Cited by 52Machine Learning in HealthcareSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Dynamic survival prediction in intensive care units from heterogeneous time series without the need for variable selection or curation

Open access
Deasy, Jacob, Liò, Pietro, Ercole, Ari·2020·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Extensive monitoring in intensive care units (ICUs) generates large quantities of data which contain numerous trends that are difficult for clinicians to systematically evaluate. Current approaches to such heterogeneity in electronic health records (EHRs) discard pertinent information. We present a deep learning pipeline that uses all uncurated chart, lab, and output events for prediction of in-hospital mortality without variable selection. Over 21,000 ICU patients and tens of thousands of variables derived from the MIMIC-III database were used to train and validate our model. Recordings in the first few hours of a patient’s stay were found to be strongly predictive of mortality, outperforming models using SAPS II and OASIS scores, AUROC 0.72 and 0.76 at 24 h respectively, within just 12 h of ICU admission. Our model achieves a very strong predictive performance of AUROC 0.85 (95% CI 0.83–0.86) after 48 h. Predictive performance increases over the first 48 h, but suffers from diminishing returns, providing rationale for time-limited trials of critical care and suggesting that the timing of decision making can be optimised and individualised.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-020-79142-z

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [15]Data MC Secondary Analysis of Electronic Health Records 2016 Berlin Springer 31314219
  2. [25]Bengio Y Ducharme R Vincent P Jauvin C A neural probabilistic language model Journal of machine learning research 2003 3 1137 1155

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deasy, J., Liò, P., & Ercole, A.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Deasy, Jacob
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2020-12-17
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
22129-22129
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3111842226
Cited by
52
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
in-hospital mortality prediction, intensive care unit, heterogeneous time series, electronic health records, deep learning, MIMIC-III, early mortality prediction, clinical decision-making, feature selection, SAPS II
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Critical Care, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Models, Theoretical, Patient Admission, ROC Curve, Time Factors, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Hospital Mortality, Health Care Surveys, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review