We have located links that may give you full text access.
Real-time interactive artificial intelligence of things-based prediction for adverse outcomes in adult patients with pneumonia in the emergency department.
Academic Emergency Medicine 2021 July 30
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence of things (AIoT) may be a solution for predicting adverse outcomes in emergency department (ED) patients with pneumonia; however, this issue remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted this study to clarify it.
METHODS: We identified 52,626 adult ED patients with pneumonia from three hospitals between 2010 and 2019 for this study. Thirty-three feature variables from electronic medical records were used to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict sepsis or septic shock, respiratory failure, and mortality. After comparisons of the predictive accuracies among logistic regression, random forest, support-vector machine (SVM), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), multilayer perceptron (MLP), and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), we selected the best one to build the model. We further combined the AI model with the Internet of things as AIoT, added an interactive mode, and implemented it in the hospital information system to assist clinicians with decision making in real time. We also compared the AIoT-based model with the confusion-urea-respiratory rate-blood pressure-65 (CURB-65) and pneumonia severity index (PSI) for predicting mortality.
RESULTS: The best AI algorithms were random forest for sepsis or septic shock (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.781), LightGBM for respiratory failure (AUC = 0.847), and mortality (AUC = 0.835). The AIoT-based model represented better performance than CURB-65 and PSI indicators for predicting mortality (0.835 vs. 0.681 and 0.835 vs. 0.728).
CONCLUSIONS: A real-time interactive AIoT-based model might be a better tool for predicting adverse outcomes in ED patients with pneumonia. Further validation in other populations is warranted.
METHODS: We identified 52,626 adult ED patients with pneumonia from three hospitals between 2010 and 2019 for this study. Thirty-three feature variables from electronic medical records were used to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict sepsis or septic shock, respiratory failure, and mortality. After comparisons of the predictive accuracies among logistic regression, random forest, support-vector machine (SVM), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), multilayer perceptron (MLP), and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), we selected the best one to build the model. We further combined the AI model with the Internet of things as AIoT, added an interactive mode, and implemented it in the hospital information system to assist clinicians with decision making in real time. We also compared the AIoT-based model with the confusion-urea-respiratory rate-blood pressure-65 (CURB-65) and pneumonia severity index (PSI) for predicting mortality.
RESULTS: The best AI algorithms were random forest for sepsis or septic shock (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.781), LightGBM for respiratory failure (AUC = 0.847), and mortality (AUC = 0.835). The AIoT-based model represented better performance than CURB-65 and PSI indicators for predicting mortality (0.835 vs. 0.681 and 0.835 vs. 0.728).
CONCLUSIONS: A real-time interactive AIoT-based model might be a better tool for predicting adverse outcomes in ED patients with pneumonia. Further validation in other populations is warranted.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app