Expert-augmented machine learning for predicting extubation readiness in the pediatric intensive care unit.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Jean Digitale, Deborah Franzon, Jin Ge, Charles McCulloch, Mark J Pletcher, Efstathios D Gennatas
{"title":"Expert-augmented machine learning for predicting extubation readiness in the pediatric intensive care unit.","authors":"Jean Digitale, Deborah Franzon, Jin Ge, Charles McCulloch, Mark J Pletcher, Efstathios D Gennatas","doi":"10.1186/s12911-025-03070-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Determining extubation readiness in pediatric intensive care units (PICU) is challenging. We used expert-augmented machine learning (EAML), a method that combines machine learning with human expert knowledge, to predict successful extubation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We extracted electronic health record data from patients in two PICUs. Data from patients in one unit was split into 80% training and 20% test, while patients in the other served as an external test set. EAML begins by training RuleFit, which converts gradient-boosted trees into decision rules. Then, expert clinicians were asked to assess the relative probability of successful extubation of the subgroup defined by each rule compared with the entire sample. The rules were ranked in order of increasing chance of successful extubation according to (1) the RuleFit model and (2) clinician assessment, and differences between the two rankings were calculated. The initial RuleFit model was then regularized based on these differences, producing the EAML model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The RuleFit model selected 46 rules; we surveyed 25 clinician experts to provide feedback on them. All clinicians worked in a PICU setting and were from multiple disciplines; over half (56%) had > 5 years of PICU experience. As expected, the added regularization slightly lowered performance of EAML compared with RuleFit in the internal test set, although the difference was not statistically significant (RuleFit AUC = 0.817 vs. best-performing EAML model AUC = 0.814, difference = 0.003, 95% CI of difference = -0.009, 0.003). EAML had superior performance in the external test set (RuleFit AUC = 0.791 vs. best-performing EAML model AUC = 0.799, difference = 0.007, 95% CI of difference = 0.002, 0.013).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When creating a model to predict successful extubation in PICU patients, incorporating expert knowledge directly into the model construction process via EAML produced a model more generalizable to an external test set.</p>","PeriodicalId":9340,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","volume":"25 1","pages":"232"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12220236/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-025-03070-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Determining extubation readiness in pediatric intensive care units (PICU) is challenging. We used expert-augmented machine learning (EAML), a method that combines machine learning with human expert knowledge, to predict successful extubation.

Methods: We extracted electronic health record data from patients in two PICUs. Data from patients in one unit was split into 80% training and 20% test, while patients in the other served as an external test set. EAML begins by training RuleFit, which converts gradient-boosted trees into decision rules. Then, expert clinicians were asked to assess the relative probability of successful extubation of the subgroup defined by each rule compared with the entire sample. The rules were ranked in order of increasing chance of successful extubation according to (1) the RuleFit model and (2) clinician assessment, and differences between the two rankings were calculated. The initial RuleFit model was then regularized based on these differences, producing the EAML model.

Results: The RuleFit model selected 46 rules; we surveyed 25 clinician experts to provide feedback on them. All clinicians worked in a PICU setting and were from multiple disciplines; over half (56%) had > 5 years of PICU experience. As expected, the added regularization slightly lowered performance of EAML compared with RuleFit in the internal test set, although the difference was not statistically significant (RuleFit AUC = 0.817 vs. best-performing EAML model AUC = 0.814, difference = 0.003, 95% CI of difference = -0.009, 0.003). EAML had superior performance in the external test set (RuleFit AUC = 0.791 vs. best-performing EAML model AUC = 0.799, difference = 0.007, 95% CI of difference = 0.002, 0.013).

Conclusions: When creating a model to predict successful extubation in PICU patients, incorporating expert knowledge directly into the model construction process via EAML produced a model more generalizable to an external test set.

专家增强机器学习预测拔管准备在儿科重症监护病房。
背景:在儿科重症监护病房(PICU)确定拔管准备是具有挑战性的。我们使用专家增强机器学习(EAML),一种将机器学习与人类专家知识相结合的方法,来预测成功拔管。方法:我们从两个picu的患者中提取电子健康记录数据。一个单元的患者数据分为80%的训练和20%的测试,而另一个单元的患者作为外部测试集。EAML首先训练RuleFit,它将梯度增强树转换为决策规则。然后,专家临床医生被要求评估每条规则定义的亚组与整个样本相比成功拔管的相对概率。根据(1)RuleFit模型和(2)临床医生评价,将规则按拔管成功率增加的先后顺序排列,并计算两者排名的差值。然后,初始的RuleFit模型基于这些差异进行正则化,生成EAML模型。结果:RuleFit模型选取了46条规则;我们对25位临床专家进行了调查,以提供反馈。所有临床医生都在PICU环境下工作,并且来自多个学科;超过一半(56%)有50年PICU工作经验。正如预期的那样,在内部测试集中,与RuleFit相比,添加正则化略微降低了EAML的性能,尽管差异没有统计学意义(RuleFit AUC = 0.817 vs.表现最好的EAML模型AUC = 0.814,差异= 0.003,差异的95% CI = -0.009, 0.003)。EAML在外部测试集中表现更优(RuleFit AUC = 0.791 vs.最佳EAML模型AUC = 0.799,差异= 0.007,95% CI = 0.002, 0.013)。结论:在创建预测PICU患者拔管成功的模型时,通过EAML将专家知识直接纳入模型构建过程,产生了一个更适用于外部测试集的模型。
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
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the design, development, implementation, use, and evaluation of health information technologies and decision-making for human health.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信