Predictive models for ICU patient readmission based on machine learning: A systematic review.

IF 1.4 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Zhixiang Zheng, Wenjun Yan, Kai Cao, Zhi Zhao
{"title":"Predictive models for ICU patient readmission based on machine learning: A systematic review.","authors":"Zhixiang Zheng, Wenjun Yan, Kai Cao, Zhi Zhao","doi":"10.1177/17511437261431540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) prediction models can accurately identify high-risk populations by integrating multi-dimensional clinical data, providing decision support for doctors in formulating individualized discharge plans and optimizing follow-up intervention strategies, thereby reducing the risk of readmission from the source. Currently, the number of AI prediction models for readmission of critically ill patients is increasing, but the quality and applicability of these models in clinical practice and future research remain uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate published studies on AI prediction models for critically ill patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study conducted a computerized search of the CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Embase databases, with the time range from 2020 to June 25, 2025. Information such as study design, data sources, outcome definitions, sample size, predictors, model development, and performance was extracted from the selected studies. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias and applicability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 387 studies were retrieved, and after screening, 31 studies with their 31 prediction models were included in this review. All studies developed risk prediction models for readmission of critically ill patients using artificial intelligence algorithms. The readmission risk of critically ill patients ranged from 1.3% to 13.7%. The most commonly used predictors were structured data. The reported area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.66 to 0.98. All studies had a high risk of bias, mainly due to poor reporting quality in the analysis domain and insufficient applicability. The pooled AUC of the 24 validation models was 0.82, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.77-0.87.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These study results constitute a comprehensive set of high-quality evidence, demonstrating that AI prediction models exhibit moderate-to-high predictive performance and that their predictive performance is significantly higher than that of traditional prediction models.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No Patient or Public Contribution. This Meta-analysis is based on the systematic review and statistical combination of the published clinical research data. The processes of research design, data extraction, and result interpretation did not involve the participation of patients or the public.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>The protocol for this study has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42025637829).</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":" ","pages":"17511437261431540"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13050372/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437261431540","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) prediction models can accurately identify high-risk populations by integrating multi-dimensional clinical data, providing decision support for doctors in formulating individualized discharge plans and optimizing follow-up intervention strategies, thereby reducing the risk of readmission from the source. Currently, the number of AI prediction models for readmission of critically ill patients is increasing, but the quality and applicability of these models in clinical practice and future research remain uncertain.

Objective: To systematically evaluate published studies on AI prediction models for critically ill patients.

Methods: This study conducted a computerized search of the CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Embase databases, with the time range from 2020 to June 25, 2025. Information such as study design, data sources, outcome definitions, sample size, predictors, model development, and performance was extracted from the selected studies. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias and applicability.

Results: A total of 387 studies were retrieved, and after screening, 31 studies with their 31 prediction models were included in this review. All studies developed risk prediction models for readmission of critically ill patients using artificial intelligence algorithms. The readmission risk of critically ill patients ranged from 1.3% to 13.7%. The most commonly used predictors were structured data. The reported area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.66 to 0.98. All studies had a high risk of bias, mainly due to poor reporting quality in the analysis domain and insufficient applicability. The pooled AUC of the 24 validation models was 0.82, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.77-0.87.

Conclusion: These study results constitute a comprehensive set of high-quality evidence, demonstrating that AI prediction models exhibit moderate-to-high predictive performance and that their predictive performance is significantly higher than that of traditional prediction models.

Patient or public contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution. This Meta-analysis is based on the systematic review and statistical combination of the published clinical research data. The processes of research design, data extraction, and result interpretation did not involve the participation of patients or the public.

Registration: The protocol for this study has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42025637829).

基于机器学习的ICU患者再入院预测模型:系统综述。
背景:人工智能(AI)预测模型通过整合临床多维数据,准确识别高危人群,为医生制定个体化出院计划和优化随访干预策略提供决策支持,从而从源头上降低再入院风险。目前,危重患者再入院人工智能预测模型的数量不断增加,但这些模型在临床实践和未来研究中的质量和适用性仍不确定。目的:对已发表的危重患者人工智能预测模型进行系统评价。方法:计算机检索中国知网、万方数据、维普、中国医学信息网、PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane、Embase等数据库,时间范围为2020年至2025年6月25日。从选定的研究中提取研究设计、数据源、结果定义、样本量、预测因子、模型开发和性能等信息。使用预测模型偏倚风险评估工具(PROBAST)检查表评估偏倚风险和适用性。结果:共检索到387项研究,经筛选,31项研究及其31种预测模型被纳入本综述。所有研究都利用人工智能算法建立了危重患者再入院的风险预测模型。危重患者再入院风险为1.3% ~ 13.7%。最常用的预测因子是结构化数据。曲线下面积(AUC)为0.66 ~ 0.98。所有研究均存在较高的偏倚风险,主要原因是分析领域的报告质量较差,适用性不足。24个验证模型的合并AUC为0.82,95%置信区间为0.77 ~ 0.87。结论:这些研究结果构成了一套全面的高质量证据,表明人工智能预测模型具有中高的预测性能,其预测性能明显高于传统预测模型。患者或公众捐赠:无患者或公众捐赠。本meta分析是基于对已发表临床研究数据的系统回顾和统计结合。研究设计、数据提取和结果解释的过程不涉及患者或公众的参与。注册:本研究方案已在PROSPERO注册(注册号:CRD42025637829)。
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
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Nursing-Critical Care Nursing
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.
×
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
小红书