Jacob C. Jentzer , Shrinath Patel , Ognjen Gajic , Vitaly Herasevich , Francisco Lopez-Jimenez , Dennis H. Murphree , Parag C. Patel , Kianoush B. Kashani
{"title":"Early prediction of shock in intensive care unit patients by machine learning using discrete electronic health record data","authors":"Jacob C. Jentzer , Shrinath Patel , Ognjen Gajic , Vitaly Herasevich , Francisco Lopez-Jimenez , Dennis H. Murphree , Parag C. Patel , Kianoush B. Kashani","doi":"10.1016/j.jcrc.2025.155093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To use machine learning to predict new-onset shock for at-risk intensive care unit (ICU) patients based on discrete vital sign data from the electronic health record.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and results</h3><div>We included 11,305 adult cardiac, medical, neurological, and surgical ICU patients who did not have shock within 4 h of ICU admission. We used routine vital sign data collected from the first 4 h of the ICU stay to predict new-onset shock within the subsequent 4 h. We compared logistic regression with machine learning models including elastic net, random forest, boosted trees and extreme gradient boosting (XGB). Median age was 64.0 years (44.5 % females). New-onset shock after 4 h developed in 483 (4.3 %) patients, and these patients had higher ICU (8.5 % vs. 1.9 %) and in-hospital (14.3 % vs. 5.0 %) mortality. Standard logistic regression had limited discrimination for new-onset shock, with the best single predictors being the maximum shock index and the minimum blood pressure during the second 2 h of the ICU stay. Discrimination in the validation cohort (<em>n</em> = 2826) was better for each ML model: elastic net, 0.76; boosted tree, 0.76; random forest, 0.79; XGB, 0.82; each model had ≥ 98 % negative predictive value. Accuracy was highest (81 %) with XGB, although positive predictive value was only 14 %. The XGB model also predicted in-hospital mortality with good discrimination.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Machine learning prediction models can achieve very good discrimination and accuracy for new-onset shock in ICU patients using vital sign data within 4 h after ICU admission.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15451,"journal":{"name":"Journal of critical care","volume":"88 ","pages":"Article 155093"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of critical care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944125000802","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
To use machine learning to predict new-onset shock for at-risk intensive care unit (ICU) patients based on discrete vital sign data from the electronic health record.
Methods and results
We included 11,305 adult cardiac, medical, neurological, and surgical ICU patients who did not have shock within 4 h of ICU admission. We used routine vital sign data collected from the first 4 h of the ICU stay to predict new-onset shock within the subsequent 4 h. We compared logistic regression with machine learning models including elastic net, random forest, boosted trees and extreme gradient boosting (XGB). Median age was 64.0 years (44.5 % females). New-onset shock after 4 h developed in 483 (4.3 %) patients, and these patients had higher ICU (8.5 % vs. 1.9 %) and in-hospital (14.3 % vs. 5.0 %) mortality. Standard logistic regression had limited discrimination for new-onset shock, with the best single predictors being the maximum shock index and the minimum blood pressure during the second 2 h of the ICU stay. Discrimination in the validation cohort (n = 2826) was better for each ML model: elastic net, 0.76; boosted tree, 0.76; random forest, 0.79; XGB, 0.82; each model had ≥ 98 % negative predictive value. Accuracy was highest (81 %) with XGB, although positive predictive value was only 14 %. The XGB model also predicted in-hospital mortality with good discrimination.
Conclusions
Machine learning prediction models can achieve very good discrimination and accuracy for new-onset shock in ICU patients using vital sign data within 4 h after ICU admission.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Critical Care, the official publication of the World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine (WFSICCM), is a leading international, peer-reviewed journal providing original research, review articles, tutorials, and invited articles for physicians and allied health professionals involved in treating the critically ill. The Journal aims to improve patient care by furthering understanding of health systems research and its integration into clinical practice.
The Journal will include articles which discuss:
All aspects of health services research in critical care
System based practice in anesthesiology, perioperative and critical care medicine
The interface between anesthesiology, critical care medicine and pain
Integrating intraoperative management in preparation for postoperative critical care management and recovery
Optimizing patient management, i.e., exploring the interface between evidence-based principles or clinical insight into management and care of complex patients
The team approach in the OR and ICU
System-based research
Medical ethics
Technology in medicine
Seminars discussing current, state of the art, and sometimes controversial topics in anesthesiology, critical care medicine, and professional education
Residency Education.