6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Use of machine learning to analyse routinely collected intensive care unit data: a systematic review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Intensive care units (ICUs) face financial, bed management, and staffing constraints. Detailed data covering all aspects of patients’ journeys into and through intensive care are now collected and stored in electronic health records: machine learning has been used to analyse such data in order to provide decision support to clinicians.

          Methods

          Systematic review of the applications of machine learning to routinely collected ICU data. Web of Science and MEDLINE databases were searched to identify candidate articles: those on image processing were excluded. The study aim, the type of machine learning used, the size of dataset analysed, whether and how the model was validated, and measures of predictive accuracy were extracted.

          Results

          Of 2450 papers identified, 258 fulfilled eligibility criteria. The most common study aims were predicting complications (77 papers [29.8% of studies]), predicting mortality (70 [27.1%]), improving prognostic models (43 [16.7%]), and classifying sub-populations (29 [11.2%]). Median sample size was 488 (IQR 108–4099): 41 studies analysed data on > 10,000 patients. Analyses focused on 169 (65.5%) papers that used machine learning to predict complications, mortality, length of stay, or improvement of health. Predictions were validated in 161 (95.2%) of these studies: the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was reported by 97 (60.2%) but only 10 (6.2%) validated predictions using independent data. The median AUC was 0.83 in studies of 1000–10,000 patients, rising to 0.94 in studies of > 100,000 patients. The most common machine learning methods were neural networks (72 studies [42.6%]), support vector machines (40 [23.7%]), and classification/decision trees (34 [20.1%]). Since 2015 (125 studies [48.4%]), the most common methods were support vector machines (37 studies [29.6%]) and random forests (29 [23.2%]).

          Conclusions

          The rate of publication of studies using machine learning to analyse routinely collected ICU data is increasing rapidly. The sample sizes used in many published studies are too small to exploit the potential of these methods. Methodological and reporting guidelines are needed, particularly with regard to the choice of method and validation of predictions, to increase confidence in reported findings and aid in translating findings towards routine use in clinical practice.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2564-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database

          MIMIC-III (‘Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care’) is a large, single-center database comprising information relating to patients admitted to critical care units at a large tertiary care hospital. Data includes vital signs, medications, laboratory measurements, observations and notes charted by care providers, fluid balance, procedure codes, diagnostic codes, imaging reports, hospital length of stay, survival data, and more. The database supports applications including academic and industrial research, quality improvement initiatives, and higher education coursework.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

            The CONSORT statement is used worldwide to improve the reporting of randomised controlled trials. Kenneth Schulz and colleagues describe the latest version, CONSORT 2010, which updates the reporting guideline based on new methodological evidence and accumulating experience. To encourage dissemination of the CONSORT 2010 Statement, this article is freely accessible on bmj.com and will also be published in the Lancet, Obstetrics and Gynecology, PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, Open Medicine, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, BMC Medicine, and Trials.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Machine Learning in Medicine

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ds17453@bristol.ac.uk
                Jonathan.Sterne@bristol.ac.uk
                A.R.Champneys@bristol.ac.uk
                +44 (0)7931 568135 , ben.gibbison@bristol.ac.uk
                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                22 August 2019
                22 August 2019
                2019
                : 23
                : 284
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7603, GRID grid.5337.2, NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, , University of Bristol, ; Bristol, UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7603, GRID grid.5337.2, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, , University of Bristol, ; Bristol, UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7603, GRID grid.5337.2, Department of Engineering Mathematics, , University of Bristol, ; Bristol, UK
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7603, GRID grid.5337.2, Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, , University of Bristol, ; Bristol, UK
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0399 4514, GRID grid.418482.3, Department of Anaesthesia, , Bristol Royal Infirmary, ; Level 7 Queens Building, Upper Maudlin St, Bristol, BS2 8HW UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3635-6212
                Article
                2564
                10.1186/s13054-019-2564-9
                6704673
                31439010
                7ff6d2c6-fb82-4bdf-9db3-03c1fbecb43c
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 12 June 2019
                : 9 August 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Award ID: BRC at University of Bristol and UH Bristol NHSFT
                Award ID: BRC at the University of Bristol and UH Bristol NHS FT
                Award ID: BRC at The University of Bristol and UH Bristol NHS FT
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                artificial intelligence,machine learning,intensive care unit,routinely collected data

                Comments

                Comment on this article