• Journal of critical care · Dec 2024

    Review

    Machine learning for predicting mortality in adult critically ill patients with Sepsis: A systematic review.

    • Nasrin Nikravangolsefid, Swetha Reddy, Hong Hieu Truong, Mariam Charkviani, Jacob Ninan, Larry J Prokop, Supawadee Suppadungsuk, Waryaam Singh, Kianoush B Kashani, and GarcesJuan Pablo DomecqJPDDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Department of Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, Mankato, MN, USA. Electronic address: domecq.juan@mayo.edu..
    • Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
    • J Crit Care. 2024 Dec 1; 84: 154889154889.

    IntroductionVarious Machine Learning (ML) models have been used to predict sepsis-associated mortality. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the methodologies employed in studies to predict mortality among patients with sepsis.MethodsFollowing a pre-established protocol registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, we performed a comprehensive search of databases from inception to February 2024. We included peer-reviewed articles reporting predicting mortality in critically ill adult patients with sepsis.ResultsAmong the 1822 articles, 31 were included, involving 1,477,200 adult patients with sepsis. Nineteen studies had a high risk of bias. Among the diverse ML models, Logistic regression and eXtreme Gradient Boosting were the most frequently used, in 22 and 16 studies, respectively. Nine studies performed internal and external validation. Compared with conventional scoring systems such as SOFA, the ML models showed slightly higher performance in predicting mortality (AUROC ranges: 0.62-0.90 vs. 0.47-0.86).ConclusionsML models demonstrate a modest improvement in predicting sepsis-associated mortality. The certainty of these findings remains low due to the high risk of bias and significant heterogeneity. Studies should include comprehensive methodological details on calibration and hyperparameter selection, adopt a standardized definition of sepsis, and conduct multicenter prospective designs along with external validations.Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.