Perioperative risk scores: prediction, pitfalls, and progress.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Jonathan P Bedford, Oliver C Redfern, Benjamin O'Brien, Peter J Watkinson
{"title":"Perioperative risk scores: prediction, pitfalls, and progress.","authors":"Jonathan P Bedford, Oliver C Redfern, Benjamin O'Brien, Peter J Watkinson","doi":"10.1097/ACO.0000000000001445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Perioperative risk scores aim to risk-stratify patients to guide their evaluation and management. Several scores are established in clinical practice, but often do not generalize well to new data and require ongoing updates to improve their reliability. Recent advances in machine learning have the potential to handle multidimensional data and associated interactions, however their clinical utility has yet to be consistently demonstrated. In this review, we introduce key model performance metrics, highlight pitfalls in model development, and examine current perioperative risk scores, their limitations, and future directions in risk modelling.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Newer perioperative risk scores developed in larger cohorts appear to outperform older tools. Recent updates have further improved their performance. Machine learning techniques show promise in leveraging multidimensional data, but integrating these complex tools into clinical practice requires further validation, and a focus on implementation principles to ensure these tools are trusted and usable.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>All perioperative risk scores have some limitations, highlighting the need for robust model development and validation. Advancements in machine learning present promising opportunities to enhance this field, particularly through the integration of diverse data sources that may improve predictive performance. Future work should focus on improving model interpretability and incorporating continuous learning mechanisms to increase their clinical utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":50609,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0000000000001445","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Perioperative risk scores aim to risk-stratify patients to guide their evaluation and management. Several scores are established in clinical practice, but often do not generalize well to new data and require ongoing updates to improve their reliability. Recent advances in machine learning have the potential to handle multidimensional data and associated interactions, however their clinical utility has yet to be consistently demonstrated. In this review, we introduce key model performance metrics, highlight pitfalls in model development, and examine current perioperative risk scores, their limitations, and future directions in risk modelling.

Recent findings: Newer perioperative risk scores developed in larger cohorts appear to outperform older tools. Recent updates have further improved their performance. Machine learning techniques show promise in leveraging multidimensional data, but integrating these complex tools into clinical practice requires further validation, and a focus on implementation principles to ensure these tools are trusted and usable.

Summary: All perioperative risk scores have some limitations, highlighting the need for robust model development and validation. Advancements in machine learning present promising opportunities to enhance this field, particularly through the integration of diverse data sources that may improve predictive performance. Future work should focus on improving model interpretability and incorporating continuous learning mechanisms to increase their clinical utility.

围手术期风险评分:预测、陷阱和进展。
审查目的:围手术期风险评分旨在对患者进行风险分级,以指导对患者的评估和管理。临床实践中已经建立了一些评分标准,但往往不能很好地概括新数据,需要不断更新以提高其可靠性。机器学习的最新进展具有处理多维数据和相关交互作用的潜力,但其临床实用性还有待不断证实。在这篇综述中,我们介绍了关键的模型性能指标,强调了模型开发中的误区,并研究了当前的围手术期风险评分、其局限性以及风险建模的未来方向:最近的研究结果:在较大的队列中开发的较新围手术期风险评分似乎优于较旧的工具。最近的更新进一步提高了其性能。机器学习技术在利用多维数据方面大有可为,但将这些复杂的工具整合到临床实践中还需要进一步验证,并关注实施原则,以确保这些工具值得信赖且可用。机器学习的进步为这一领域的发展提供了良好的机遇,特别是通过整合不同的数据源,可以提高预测性能。未来的工作应侧重于提高模型的可解释性,并纳入持续学习机制,以提高其临床实用性。
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
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
207
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​Published bimonthly and offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field, each issue of Current Opinion in Anesthesiology features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With fifteen disciplines published across the year – including cardiovascular anesthesiology, neuroanesthesia and pain medicine – every issue also contains annotated references detailing the merits of the most important papers.
×
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