Development and validation of inpatient mortality prediction models for patients with hyperglycemic crisis using machine learning approaches.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Rui He, Kebiao Zhang, Hong Li, Manping Gu
{"title":"Development and validation of inpatient mortality prediction models for patients with hyperglycemic crisis using machine learning approaches.","authors":"Rui He, Kebiao Zhang, Hong Li, Manping Gu","doi":"10.1186/s12902-025-01873-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hyperglycemic crisis is one of the most common and severe complications of diabetes mellitus, associated with a high motarlity rate. Emergency admissions due to hyperglycemic crisis remain prevalent and challenging. This study aimed to develop and validate predictive models for in-hospital mortality risk among patients with hyperglycemic crisis admitted to the emergency department using various machine learning (ML) methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multi-center retrospective study was conducted across six large general adult hospitals in Chongqing, western China. Patients diagnosed with hyperglycemic crisis were identified using an electronic medical record (EMR) database. Demographics, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, laboratory results, complications, and therapeutic interventions were extracted from the medical records to construct the prognostic prediction model. Seven machine learning algorithms, including support vector machines (SVM), random forest (RF), recursive partitioning and regression trees (RPART), extreme gradient boosting with dart booster (XGBoost), multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), neural network (NNET), and adaptive boost (AdaBoost) were compared with logistic regression (LR) for predicting the risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with hyperglycemic crisis. Stratified random sampling was used to split the data into training (80%) and validation (20%) sets. Ten-fold cross validation was performed on the training set to optimize model hyperparameters. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, area under the curve (AUC) and accuracy of all models were computed for comparative analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1668 patients were eligible for the present study. The in-hospital mortality rate was 7.3% (121/1668). In the training set, feature importance scores were calculated for each of the eight models, and the top 10 significant features were identified. In the validation set, all models demonstrated good predictive capability, with areas under the curve value exceeding 0.9 with a F1 score between 0.632 and 0.81, except the MARS model. Six machine learning algorithm models outperformed the referred logistic regression algorithm except the MARS model. Among the selected models, RPART, RF, and SVM achieved the best performance in the selected models (AUC values were 0.970, 0.968 and 0.968, F1 score were 0.652, 0.762, 0.762 respectively). Feature importance analysis identified novel predictors including mechanical ventilation, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, blood gas index, first 24-hour insulin dosage, and first 24-hour fluid intake.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most machine learning algorithms exhibited excellent performance predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with hyperglycemic crisis except the MARS model, and the best one was RPART model. These algorithms identified overlapping but different, up to 10 predictors. Early identification of high-risk patients using these models could support clinical decision-making and potentially improve the prognosis of hyperglycemic crisis patients.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9152,"journal":{"name":"BMC Endocrine Disorders","volume":"25 1","pages":"86"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11948940/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Endocrine Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12902-025-01873-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hyperglycemic crisis is one of the most common and severe complications of diabetes mellitus, associated with a high motarlity rate. Emergency admissions due to hyperglycemic crisis remain prevalent and challenging. This study aimed to develop and validate predictive models for in-hospital mortality risk among patients with hyperglycemic crisis admitted to the emergency department using various machine learning (ML) methods.

Methods: A multi-center retrospective study was conducted across six large general adult hospitals in Chongqing, western China. Patients diagnosed with hyperglycemic crisis were identified using an electronic medical record (EMR) database. Demographics, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, laboratory results, complications, and therapeutic interventions were extracted from the medical records to construct the prognostic prediction model. Seven machine learning algorithms, including support vector machines (SVM), random forest (RF), recursive partitioning and regression trees (RPART), extreme gradient boosting with dart booster (XGBoost), multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), neural network (NNET), and adaptive boost (AdaBoost) were compared with logistic regression (LR) for predicting the risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with hyperglycemic crisis. Stratified random sampling was used to split the data into training (80%) and validation (20%) sets. Ten-fold cross validation was performed on the training set to optimize model hyperparameters. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, area under the curve (AUC) and accuracy of all models were computed for comparative analysis.

Results: A total of 1668 patients were eligible for the present study. The in-hospital mortality rate was 7.3% (121/1668). In the training set, feature importance scores were calculated for each of the eight models, and the top 10 significant features were identified. In the validation set, all models demonstrated good predictive capability, with areas under the curve value exceeding 0.9 with a F1 score between 0.632 and 0.81, except the MARS model. Six machine learning algorithm models outperformed the referred logistic regression algorithm except the MARS model. Among the selected models, RPART, RF, and SVM achieved the best performance in the selected models (AUC values were 0.970, 0.968 and 0.968, F1 score were 0.652, 0.762, 0.762 respectively). Feature importance analysis identified novel predictors including mechanical ventilation, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, blood gas index, first 24-hour insulin dosage, and first 24-hour fluid intake.

Conclusion: Most machine learning algorithms exhibited excellent performance predicting in-hospital mortality among patients with hyperglycemic crisis except the MARS model, and the best one was RPART model. These algorithms identified overlapping but different, up to 10 predictors. Early identification of high-risk patients using these models could support clinical decision-making and potentially improve the prognosis of hyperglycemic crisis patients.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Endocrine Disorders
BMC Endocrine Disorders ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
280
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Endocrine Disorders is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of endocrine disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
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