Cited by 62Machine Learning in HealthcareCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment

Early identification of patients admitted to hospital for covid-19 at risk of clinical deterioration: model development and multisite external validation study

Open access
Kamran, Fahad, Tang, Shengpu, Otles, Erkin, McEvoy, Dustin S, Saleh, Sameh N, Gong, Jen, Li, Benjamin Y, Dutta, Sayon +12 more·2022·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To create and validate a simple and transferable machine learning model from electronic health record data to accurately predict clinical deterioration in patients with covid-19 across institutions, through use of a novel paradigm for model development and code sharing. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: One US hospital during 2015-21 was used for model training and internal validation. External validation was conducted on patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 at 12 other US medical centers during 2020-21. PARTICIPANTS: 33 119 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with respiratory distress or covid-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: An ensemble of linear models was trained on the development cohort to predict a composite outcome of clinical deterioration within the first five days of hospital admission, defined as in-hospital mortality or any of three treatments indicating severe illness: mechanical ventilation, heated high flow nasal cannula, or intravenous vasopressors. The model was based on nine clinical and personal characteristic variables selected from 2686 variables available in the electronic health record. Internal and external validation performance was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the expected calibration error-the difference between predicted risk and actual risk. Potential bed day savings were estimated by calculating how many bed days hospitals could save per patient if low risk patients identified by the model were discharged early. RESULTS: 9291 covid-19 related hospital admissions at 13 medical centers were used for model validation, of which 1510 (16.3%) were related to the primary outcome. When the model was applied to the internal validation cohort, it achieved an AUROC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 0.84) and an expected calibration error of 0.01 (95% confidence interval 0.00 to 0.02). Performance was consistent when validated in the 12 external medical centers (AUROC range 0.77-0.84), across subgroups of sex, age, race, and ethnicity (AUROC range 0.78-0.84), and across quarters (AUROC range 0.73-0.83). Using the model to triage low risk patients could potentially save up to 7.8 bed days per patient resulting from early discharge. CONCLUSION: A model to predict clinical deterioration was developed rapidly in response to the covid-19 pandemic at a single hospital, was applied externally without the sharing of data, and performed well across multiple medical centers, patient subgroups, and time periods, showing its potential as a tool for use in optimizing healthcare resources.

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 · 10.1136/bmj-2021-068576

Cites

66 of 66 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Models using readily available EHR data can accurately predict clinical deterioration and sepsis hours before they occur.

    “Two prominent examples relevant to critical care are models using readily available EHR data that can accurately predict clinical deterioration and sepsis hours before they occur [28–33]; these models exemplify real-time CDSS that alert clinicians and prompt evaluation, testing, and interventions [33].”

    From Use of artificial intelligence in critical care: opportunities and obstacles (2024) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Discussion reports that a model using nine routinely collected EHR variables predicted clinical deterioration in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and performed well across validation cohorts. The Methods describe predictions updated every four hours, but do not establish a specific number of hours of advance warning. The paper does not report a model predicting sepsis. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

2 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [35]Hooker G Mentch L. Please Stop Permuting Features: An Explanation and Alternatives. arXiv. 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.03151 · arXiv
  2. [44]Strickland E. AI May Help Hospitals Decide Which COVID-19 Patients Live or Die. IEEE Spectrum. 2020. https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-can-help-hospitals-triage-covid19-patients (accessed 1 Jan 2022).
  3. [50]Pedregosa F Varoquaux G Gramfort A. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. J Mach Learn Res 2011; 12: 2825- 30.
  4. [62]Buolamwini J, Gebru T. Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification. In: Friedler SA, Wilson C, eds. Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. New York, NY, USA: PMLR 2018. 77-91. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kamran, F., Tang, S., Otles, E., McEvoy, D. S., Saleh, S. N., Gong, J., Li, B. Y., Dutta, S., Liu, X., Medford, R. J., Valley, T. S., West, L. R., Singh, K., Blumberg, S., Donnelly, J. P., Shenoy, E. S., Ayanian, J. Z., Nallamothu, B. K., Sjoding, M. W., & Wiens, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan College of Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
  • Mass General Brigham (US)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Wiens, Jenna
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2022-02-17
Volume
376
Pages
e068576
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4212881260
Cited by
60
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12
FWCI
4.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  • National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, clinical deterioration prediction, risk prediction model, early discharge, electronic health record data, external validation, mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, high-flow nasal cannula, in-hospital mortality, triage, COVID-19 pneumonia, COVID-19 hospitalization
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Clinical Deterioration, Clinical Decision Rules, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Hospitalization, Hospitals, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Retrospective Studies, ROC Curve, Linear Models, Risk Assessment, Area Under Curve, Young Adult, 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