Performance Evaluation of a Supervised Machine Learning Pain Classification Model Developed by Neonatal Nurses.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Advances in Neonatal Care Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1097/ANC.0000000000001145
Renee C B Manworren, Susan Horner, Ralph Joseph, Priyansh Dadar, Naomi Kaduwela
{"title":"Performance Evaluation of a Supervised Machine Learning Pain Classification Model Developed by Neonatal Nurses.","authors":"Renee C B Manworren, Susan Horner, Ralph Joseph, Priyansh Dadar, Naomi Kaduwela","doi":"10.1097/ANC.0000000000001145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early-life pain is associated with adverse neurodevelopmental consequences; and current pain assessment practices are discontinuous, inconsistent, and highly dependent on nurses' availability. Furthermore, facial expressions in commonly used pain assessment tools are not associated with brain-based evidence of pain.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To develop and validate a machine learning (ML) model to classify pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective validation study, using a human-centered design for Embedded Machine Learning Solutions approach and the Neonatal Facial Coding System (NFCS), 6 experienced neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) nurses labeled data from randomly assigned iCOPEvid (infant Classification Of Pain Expression video) sequences of 49 neonates undergoing heel lance. NFCS is the only observational pain assessment tool associated with brain-based evidence of pain. A standard 70% training and 30% testing split of the data was used to train and test several ML models. NICU nurses' interrater reliability was evaluated, and NICU nurses' area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was compared with the ML models' AUC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nurses weighted mean interrater reliability was 68% (63%-79%) for NFCS tasks, 77.7% (74%-83%) for pain intensity, and 48.6% (15%-59%) for frame and 78.4% (64%-100%) for video pain classification, with AUC of 0.68. The best performing ML model had 97.7% precision, 98% accuracy, 98.5% recall, and AUC of 0.98.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice and research: </strong>The pain classification ML model AUC far exceeded that of NICU nurses for identifying neonatal pain. These findings will inform the development of a continuous, unbiased, brain-based, nurse-in-the-loop Pain Recognition Automated Monitoring System (PRAMS) for neonates and infants.</p>","PeriodicalId":48862,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Neonatal Care","volume":" ","pages":"301-310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Neonatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANC.0000000000001145","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Early-life pain is associated with adverse neurodevelopmental consequences; and current pain assessment practices are discontinuous, inconsistent, and highly dependent on nurses' availability. Furthermore, facial expressions in commonly used pain assessment tools are not associated with brain-based evidence of pain.

Purpose: To develop and validate a machine learning (ML) model to classify pain.

Methods: In this retrospective validation study, using a human-centered design for Embedded Machine Learning Solutions approach and the Neonatal Facial Coding System (NFCS), 6 experienced neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) nurses labeled data from randomly assigned iCOPEvid (infant Classification Of Pain Expression video) sequences of 49 neonates undergoing heel lance. NFCS is the only observational pain assessment tool associated with brain-based evidence of pain. A standard 70% training and 30% testing split of the data was used to train and test several ML models. NICU nurses' interrater reliability was evaluated, and NICU nurses' area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was compared with the ML models' AUC.

Results: Nurses weighted mean interrater reliability was 68% (63%-79%) for NFCS tasks, 77.7% (74%-83%) for pain intensity, and 48.6% (15%-59%) for frame and 78.4% (64%-100%) for video pain classification, with AUC of 0.68. The best performing ML model had 97.7% precision, 98% accuracy, 98.5% recall, and AUC of 0.98.

Implications for practice and research: The pain classification ML model AUC far exceeded that of NICU nurses for identifying neonatal pain. These findings will inform the development of a continuous, unbiased, brain-based, nurse-in-the-loop Pain Recognition Automated Monitoring System (PRAMS) for neonates and infants.

新生儿护士开发的监督机器学习疼痛分类模型的性能评估。
背景:生命早期的疼痛与不良的神经发育后果有关;目前的疼痛评估方法不连贯、不一致,而且高度依赖护士的可用性。此外,常用疼痛评估工具中的面部表情与基于大脑的疼痛证据无关。目的:开发并验证一种机器学习(ML)模型来对疼痛进行分类:在这项回顾性验证研究中,6 名经验丰富的新生儿重症监护室(NICU)护士采用以人为本的嵌入式机器学习解决方案设计方法和新生儿面部编码系统(NFCS),对 49 名接受跟骨穿刺的新生儿随机分配的 iCOPEvid(婴儿疼痛表情分类视频)序列数据进行了标注。NFCS 是唯一一种与基于大脑的疼痛证据相关的观察性疼痛评估工具。对数据进行标准的 70% 训练和 30% 测试分配,用于训练和测试多个 ML 模型。对重症监护室护士的互评可靠性进行了评估,并将重症监护室护士的接收者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)与 ML 模型的 AUC 进行了比较:护士对 NFCS 任务的加权平均交互可靠性为 68% (63%-79%),对疼痛强度的加权平均交互可靠性为 77.7% (74%-83%),对帧的加权平均交互可靠性为 48.6% (15%-59%),对视频疼痛分类的加权平均交互可靠性为 78.4% (64%-100%),AUC 为 0.68。表现最好的 ML 模型精确度为 97.7%,准确度为 98%,召回率为 98.5%,AUC 为 0.98:疼痛分类 ML 模型的 AUC 远远超过 NICU 护士识别新生儿疼痛的 AUC。这些发现将为新生儿和婴儿连续、无偏见、基于大脑的护士在环疼痛识别自动监测系统(PRAMS)的开发提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
101
期刊介绍: Advances in Neonatal Care takes a unique and dynamic approach to the original research and clinical practice articles it publishes. Addressing the practice challenges faced every day—caring for the 40,000-plus low-birth-weight infants in Level II and Level III NICUs each year—the journal promotes evidence-based care and improved outcomes for the tiniest patients and their families. Peer-reviewed editorial includes unique and detailed visual and teaching aids, such as Family Teaching Toolbox, Research to Practice, Cultivating Clinical Expertise, and Online Features. Each issue offers Continuing Education (CE) articles in both print and online formats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信