4.6 Article

Early diagnosis of bloodstream infections in the intensive care unit using machine-learning algorithms

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 46, 期 3, 页码 454-462

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-019-05876-8

关键词

Nosocomial infection; Machine learning; Intensive care unit; Early diagnosis; Bacteremia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose We aimed to develop a machine-learning (ML) algorithm that can predict intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired bloodstream infections (BSI) among patients suspected of infection in the ICU. Methods The study was based on patients' electronic health records at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, and at Rambam Health Care Campus (RHCC), Haifa, Israel. We included adults from whom blood cultures were collected for suspected BSI at least 48 h after admission. Clinical data, including time-series variables and their interactions, were analyzed by an ML algorithm at each site. Prediction ability for ICU-acquired BSI was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) of ten-fold cross-validation and validation sets with 95% confidence intervals. Results The datasets comprised 2351 patients from BIDMC (151 with BSI) and 1021 from RHCC (162 with BSI). The median (inter-quartile range) age was 62 (51-75) and 56 (38-69) years, respectively; the median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 26 (21-32) and 24 (20-29), respectively. The means of the cross-validation AUROCs were 0.87 +/- 0.02 for BIDMC and 0.93 +/- 0.03 for RHCC. AUROCs of 0.89 +/- 0.01 and 0.92 +/- 0.02 were maintained in both centers with internal validation, while external validation deteriorated. Valuable predictors were mainly the trends of time-series variables such as laboratory results and vital signs. Conclusion An ML approach that uses temporal and site-specific data achieved high performance in recognizing BC samples with a high probability for ICU-acquired BSI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据