Comparison of Severity of Illness Scores and Artificial Intelligence Models Predictive of Intensive Care Unit Mortality: Meta-analysis and review of the literature (Preprint)

Prognosticating the outcome of intensive care in older patients-a narrative review

Prognosis determines major decisions regarding treatment for critically ill patients. Statistical models have been developed to predict the probability of survival and other outcomes of intensive care. Although they were trained on the characteristics of large patient cohorts, they often do not represent very old patients (age ≥ 80 years) appropriately. Moreover, the heterogeneity within this particular group impairs the utility of statistical predictions for informing decision-making in very old individuals. In addition to these methodological problems, the diversity of cultural attitudes, available resources as well as variations of legal and professional norms limit the generalisability of prediction models, especially in patients with complex multi-morbidity and pre-existing functional impairments. Thus, current approaches to prognosticating outcomes in very old patients are imperfect and can generate substantial uncertainty about optimal trajectories of critical care in the individual. This article presents the state of the art and new approaches to predicting outcomes of intensive care for these patients. Special emphasis has been given to the integration of predictions into the decision-making for individual patients. This requires quantification of prognostic uncertainty and a careful alignment of decisions with the preferences of patients, who might prioritise functional outcomes over survival. Since the performance of outcome predictions for the individual patient may improve over time, time-limited trials in intensive care may be an appropriate way to increase the confidence in decisions about life-sustaining treatment.

AI Quality Standards in Health Care: Rapid Umbrella Review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been an upwelling of artificial intelligence (AI) studies in the health care literature. During this period, there has been an increasing number of proposed standards to evaluate the quality of health care AI studies.

OBJECTIVE

This rapid umbrella review examines the use of AI quality standards in a sample of health care AI systematic review articles published over a 36-month period.

METHODS

We used a modified version of the Joanna Briggs Institute umbrella review method. Our rapid approach was informed by the practical guide by Tricco and colleagues for conducting rapid reviews. Our search was focused on the MEDLINE database supplemented with Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria were English-language systematic reviews regardless of review type, with mention of AI and health in the abstract, published during a 36-month period. For the synthesis, we summarized the AI quality standards used and issues noted in these reviews drawing on a set of published health care AI standards, harmonized the terms used, and offered guidance to improve the quality of future health care AI studies.

RESULTS

We selected 33 review articles published between 2020 and 2022 in our synthesis. The reviews covered a wide range of objectives, topics, settings, designs, and results. Over 60 AI approaches across different domains were identified with varying levels of detail spanning different AI life cycle stages, making comparisons difficult. Health care AI quality standards were applied in only 39% (13/33) of the reviews and in 14% (25/178) of the original studies from the reviews examined, mostly to appraise their methodological or reporting quality. Only a handful mentioned the transparency, explainability, trustworthiness, ethics, and privacy aspects. A total of 23 AI quality standard-related issues were identified in the reviews. There was a recognized need to standardize the planning, conduct, and reporting of health care AI studies and address their broader societal, ethical, and regulatory implications.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the growing number of AI standards to assess the quality of health care AI studies, they are seldom applied in practice. With increasing desire to adopt AI in different health topics, domains, and settings, practitioners and researchers must stay abreast of and adapt to the evolving landscape of health care AI quality standards and apply these standards to improve the quality of their AI studies.

A Systematic Review of the Application of Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Care: Where are We, and What's Next?

Background

Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into healthcare has transformed the landscape of patient care and healthcare delivery. Despite this, there remains a notable gap in the existing literature synthesizing the comprehensive understanding of AI's utilization in nursing care.

Objective

This systematic review aims to synthesize the available evidence to comprehensively understand the application of AI in nursing care.

Methods

Studies published between January 2019 and December 2023, identified through CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Web of Science, PubMed, and Medline, were included in this review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines guided the identification, screening, exclusion, and inclusion of articles. The convergent integrated analysis framework, as proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute, was employed to synthesize data from the included studies for theme generation.

Results

A total of 337 records were identified from databases. Among them, 35 duplicates were removed, and 302 records underwent eligibility screening. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, eleven studies were deemed eligible and included in this review. Through data synthesis of these studies, six themes pertaining to the use of AI in nursing care were identified: 1) Risk Identification, 2) Health Assessment, 3) Patient Classification, 4) Research Development, 5) Improved Care Delivery and Medical Records, and 6) Developing a Nursing Care Plan.

Conclusion

This systematic review contributes valuable insights into the multifaceted applications of AI in nursing care. Through the synthesis of data from the included studies, six distinct themes emerged. These findings not only consolidate the current knowledge base but also underscore the diverse ways in which AI is shaping and improving nursing care practices.

Heart rate complexity helps mortality prediction in the intensive care unit: A pilot study using artificial intelligence

BACKGROUND

In intensive care units (ICUs), accurate mortality prediction is crucial for effective patient management and resource allocation. The Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS-2), though commonly used, relies heavily on comprehensive clinical data and blood samples. This study sought to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model utilizing key hemodynamic parameters to predict ICU mortality within the first 24 h and assess its performance relative to SAPS-2.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of select hemodynamic parameters and the structure of heart rate curves to identify potential predictors of ICU mortality. A machine-learning model was subsequently trained and validated on distinct patient cohorts. The AI algorithm's performance was then compared to the SAPS-2, focusing on classification accuracy, calibration, and generalizability.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The study included 1298 ICU admissions from March 27th, 2015, to March 27th, 2017. An additional cohort from 2022 to 2023 comprised 590 patients, resulting in a total dataset of 1888 patients. The observed mortality rate stood at 24.0%. Key determinants of mortality were the Glasgow Coma Scale score, heart rate complexity, patient age, duration of diastolic blood pressure below 50 mmHg, heart rate variability, and specific mean and systolic blood pressure thresholds. The AI model, informed by these determinants, exhibited a performance profile in predicting mortality that was comparable, if not superior, to the SAPS-2.

CONCLUSIONS

The AI model, which integrates heart rate and blood pressure curve analyses with basic clinical parameters, provides a methodological approach to predict in-hospital mortality in ICU patients. This model offers an alternative to existing tools that depend on extensive clinical data and laboratory inputs. Its potential integration into ICU monitoring systems may facilitate more streamlined mortality prediction processes.

Prevalence and risk factors of exposure keratopathy among critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To identify the incidence, prevalence and risk factors of exposure keratopathy (EK) among critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis, in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 Statement.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), Weipu Database (VIP) and WanFang Database were systematically searched from inception to June 2022. Observational studies that reported EK among paediatric and adult critically ill patients were screened and included original articles based on the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently completed data extraction and quality assessments. Subgroup analysis investigated potential causes of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of the 4508 studies identified, 23 studies involving 3519 subjects were included. The pooled prevalence of EK was 34.0%, and the pooled incidence rate of EK was 23.0%. Risk factors associated with EK in critically ill patients included lagophthalmos, chemosis, eye blinks <5 times per minute, mechanical ventilation, sedation, lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score and higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score.

CONCLUSION

This review shows that EK rates are high in critically ill patients and are influenced by multiple factors. Medical staff should pay more attention to EK in critically ill patients, conduct professional evaluations and implement targeted eye care protocols to reduce its occurrence.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study shows the frequency of and multiple risk factors for EK in critically ill patients, which provides evidence-based guidance for nurses to evaluate the risk of EK in critically ill patients and take appropriate precautions to reduce the risk.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) (CRD42022346964).

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

The Evolution and Future of Intensive Care Management in the Era of Telecritical Care and Artificial Intelligence

Critical care practice has been embodied in the healthcare system since the institutionalization of intensive care units (ICUs) in the late '50s. Over time, this sector has experienced many changes and improvements in providing immediate and dedicated healthcare as patients requiring intensive care are often frail and critically ill with high mortality and morbidity rates. These changes were aided by innovations in diagnostic, therapeutic, and monitoring technologies, as well as the implementation of evidence-based guidelines and organizational structures within the ICU. In this review, we examine these changes in intensive care management over the past 40 years and their impact on the quality of care available to patients. Moreover, the current state of intensive care management is characterized by a multidisciplinary approach and the use of innovative technologies and research databases. Advancements such as telecritical care and artificial intelligence are being increasingly explored, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, to reduce the length of hospitalization and ICU mortality. With these advancements in intensive care and ever-changing patient needs, critical care experts, hospital managers, and policymakers must also explore appropriate organizational structures and future enhancements within the ICU.

Machine Learning for Benchmarking Critical Care Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Enhancing critical care efficacy involves evaluating and improving system functioning. Benchmarking, a retrospective comparison of results against standards, aids risk-adjusted assessment and helps healthcare providers identify areas for improvement based on observed and predicted outcomes. The last two decades have seen the development of several models using machine learning (ML) for clinical outcome prediction. ML is a field of artificial intelligence focused on creating algorithms that enable computers to learn from and make predictions or decisions based on data. This narrative review centers on key discoveries and outcomes to aid clinicians and researchers in selecting the optimal methodology for critical care benchmarking using ML.

METHODS

We used PubMed to search the literature from 2003 to 2023 regarding predictive models utilizing ML for mortality (592 articles), length of stay (143 articles), or mechanical ventilation (195 articles). We supplemented the PubMed search with Google Scholar, making sure relevant articles were included. Given the narrative style, papers in the cohort were manually curated for a comprehensive reader perspective.

RESULTS

Our report presents comparative results for benchmarked outcomes and emphasizes advancements in feature types, preprocessing, model selection, and validation. It showcases instances where ML effectively tackled critical care outcome-prediction challenges, including nonlinear relationships, class imbalances, missing data, and documentation variability, leading to enhanced results.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ML has provided novel tools to improve the benchmarking of critical care outcomes, areas that require further research include class imbalance, fairness, improved calibration, generalizability, and long-term validation of published models.

Passive digital markers for Alzheimer's disease and other related dementias: A systematic evidence review

BACKGROUND

The timely detection of Alzheimer's disease and other related dementias (ADRD) is suboptimal. Digital data already stored in electronic health records (EHR) offer opportunities for enhancing the timely detection of ADRD by facilitating the development of passive digital markers (PDMs). We conducted a systematic evidence review to identify studies that describe the development, performance, and validity of EHR-based PDMs for ADRD.

METHODS

We searched the literature published from January 2000 to August 2022 and reviewed cross-sectional, retrospective, or prospective observational studies with a patient population of 18 years or older, published in English that collected and interpreted original data, included EHR as a source of digital data, and had the primary purpose of supporting ADRD care. We extracted relevant data from the included studies with guidance from the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies checklist and used the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria to appraise each study.

RESULTS

We included and appraised 19 studies. Four studies were considered to have a fair quality, and none was considered to have a good quality. The functionality of the PDMs varied from detecting mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer's disease or ADRD, to forecasting stages of ADRD. Only seven studies used a valid reference diagnostic method. Nine PDMs used only structured EHR data, and five studies provided complete information on the race and ethnicity of its population. The number of features included in the PDMs ranges from 10 to 853, and the PMDs used a variety of statistical and machine learning algorithms with various time-at-risk windows. The area under the curve (AUC) for the PDMs varied from 0.67 to 0.97.

CONCLUSION

Although we noted heterogeneity in the PDMs development and performance, there is evidence that these PDMs have the potential to detect ADRD at earlier stages.

The Quality and Utility of Artificial Intelligence in Patient Care

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in patient care. In the future, physicians will need to understand not only the basic functioning of AI applications, but also their quality, utility, and risks.

METHODS

This article is based on a selective review of the literature on the principles, quality, limitations, and benefits AI applications in patient care, along with examples of individual applications.

RESULTS

The number of AI applications in patient care is rising, with more than 500 approvals in the United States to date. Their quality and utility are based on a number of interdependent factors, including the real-life setting, the type and amount of data collected, the choice of variables used by the application, the algorithms used, and the goal and implementation of each application. Bias (which may be hidden) and errors can arise at all these levels. Any evaluation of the quality and utility of an AI application must, therefore, be conducted according to the scientific principles of evidence-based medicine-a requirement that is often hampered by a lack of transparency.

CONCLUSION

AI has the potential to improve patient care while meeting the challenge of dealing with an ever-increasing surfeit of information and data in medicine with limited human resources. The limitations and risks of AI applications require critical and responsible consideration. This can best be achieved through a combination of scientific.

D-Dimer as a Prognostic Factor in a Tertiary Center Intensive Coronary Care Unit

INTRODUCTION

D-dimer is a small protein fragment produced during fibrinolysis. High D-dimer levels were shown to have prognostic impact in critically ill patients. Nevertheless, data regarding D-dimer's prognostic impact among tertiary care intensive coronary care unit (ICCU) patients is scarce.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

All patients admitted to the ICCU between 1-12/2020 were prospectively included. Based on admission D-dimer level, patients were categorized into low and high D-dimer groups (< 500 ng/ml and ≥ 500 ng/ml) and also to age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff (500 ng/ml for ages ≤ 50 years old and age*10 for ages>50 years old).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 959 consecutive patients were included, including 296 (27.4%) and 663 (61.3%) patients with low and high D-Dimer levels, respectively. Patients with high D-dimer level were older compared with patients with low D-dimer level (age 70.4 ± 15 and 59 ± 13 years, p = 0.004) and had more comorbidities. The most common primary diagnosis on admission among the low D-dimer group was acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (74.3%), while in the high D-dimer group it was a combination of ACS (33.6%), cardiac structural interventions (26.7%) and various arrhythmias (21.1%). High D-dimer levels were associated with increased mortality rate, even after adjustment for age, gender, comorbidities and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). High D-dimer levels were independently associated with increased overall 1-year mortality rate (HR = 5.8; 95% CI; 1.7-19.1; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Elevated D-dimer levels on admission in ICCU patients is an independently poor prognostic factor for in-hospital morbidity and 1-year overall mortality rate following hospitalization.