RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Prediction of Sepsis Mortality in ICU Patients Using Machine Learning Methods
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.03.14.24304184
DO 10.1101/2024.03.14.24304184
A1 Gao, Jiayi
A1 Lu, Yuying
A1 Ashrafi, Negin
A1 Domingo, Ian
A1 Alaei, Kamiar
A1 Pishgar, Maryam
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/26/2024.03.14.24304184.abstract
AB Problem Sepsis, a life-threatening condition, accounts for the deaths of millions of people worldwide. Accurate prediction of sepsis outcomes is crucial for effective treatment and management. Previous studies have utilized machine learning for prognosis, but have limitations in feature sets and model interpretability.Aim This study aims to develop a machine learning model that enhances prediction accuracy for sepsis outcomes using a reduced set of features, thereby addressing the limitations of previous studies and enhancing model interpretability.Methods This study analyzes intensive care patient outcomes using the MIMIC-IV database, focusing on adult sepsis cases. Employing the latest data extraction tools, such as Google Big- Query, and following stringent selection criteria, we selected 38 features in this study. This selection is also informed by a comprehensive literature review and clinical expertise. Data preprocessing included handling missing values, regrouping categorical variables, and using the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE) to balance the data. We evaluated several machine learning models: Decision Trees, Gradient Boosting, XGBoost, LightGBM, Multilayer Perceptrons (MLP), Support Vector Machines (SVM), and Random Forest. The Sequential Halving and Classification (SHAC) algorithm was used for hyperparameter tuning, and both train-test split and cross-validation methodologies were employed for performance and computational efficiency.Results The Random Forest model was the most effective, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.94 with a confidence interval of ±0.01. This significantly outperformed other models and set a new benchmark in the literature. The model also provided detailed insights into the importance of various clinical features, with the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and average urine output being highly predictive. SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) analysis further enhanced the model’s interpretability, offering a clearer understanding of feature impacts.Conclusion This study demonstrates significant improvements in predicting sepsis outcomes using a Random Forest model, supported by advanced machine learning techniques and thorough data preprocessing. Our approach provided detailed insights into the key clinical features impacting sepsis mortality, making the model both highly accurate and interpretable. By enhancing the model’s practical utility in clinical settings, we offer a valuable tool for healthcare professionals to make data-driven decisions, ultimately aiming to minimize sepsis-induced fatalities.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The raw dataset is available in the MIMIC-IV repository:https://physionet.org/content/mimiciv/2.2/I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.Yeshttps://github.com/yuyinglu2000/Sepsis-Mortality.git https://github.com/yuyinglu2000/Sepsis-Mortality.git https://physionet.org/content/mimiciv/2.2/