2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.02.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A machine learning approach to predict healthcare-associated infections at intensive care unit admission: findings from the SPIN-UTI project

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In summary, our analyses showed that birthweight and central line catheterization days were significant predictors of suffering from HABSI, and the LR and MLP achieved the highest AUC, accuracy and F1-macro score in the prediction of HABSI. Despite different efforts in the literature for the predicting the risk of HAIs and other adverse outcomes in ICU, these studies primarily focused on the use of Support Vector Machine (SVM) [ 16 , 17 ] or divide patients into clusters [ 18 ] without considering more recent artificial intelligence approaches (e.g., XGB or Catboost) and the large set of features used in our analysis. Our approach achieved better classification performances in accuracy and AUC w.r.t.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In summary, our analyses showed that birthweight and central line catheterization days were significant predictors of suffering from HABSI, and the LR and MLP achieved the highest AUC, accuracy and F1-macro score in the prediction of HABSI. Despite different efforts in the literature for the predicting the risk of HAIs and other adverse outcomes in ICU, these studies primarily focused on the use of Support Vector Machine (SVM) [ 16 , 17 ] or divide patients into clusters [ 18 ] without considering more recent artificial intelligence approaches (e.g., XGB or Catboost) and the large set of features used in our analysis. Our approach achieved better classification performances in accuracy and AUC w.r.t.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notably, the main novelties of our approach concerned the analysis of HABSIs from different points of view (predictive and statistical analyses) in a cohort of 1203 patients at the level III NICU of the “Federico II” University Hospital in Naples from 2016 to 2020 (60 months). Despite different efforts in the literature for predicting the risk of HABSIs and other adverse outcomes in the ICU, these studies primarily focused on the use of Support Vector Machine (SVM) [ 16 , 17 ] or divided patients into clusters [ 18 ] without considering more recent Artificial Intelligence approaches (e.g., XGB or Catboost) or the large set of features in our analyses. Notably, our approach achieved better classification performances in accuracy and Area Under Curve (AUC) [ 16 , 17 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…With this in mind, it is also worth stressing that about half of the four selected HAIs might be preventable through improvements in clinical practice, medical procedures, and the development and implementation of evidence-based IPC strategies [ 16 ]. Moreover, several innovative tools have been developed to reduce the incidence of HAIs and to predict patients at higher risk of adverse outcomes [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. Indeed, the implementation of multimodal IPC strategies targeted to specific HAIs and groups of patients could halve the total burden of HAIs in acute care hospitals, focusing efforts to respond to the most urgent needs [ 16 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, the evidence supported here and elsewhere [19] suggests that HCQ treatment may be more effective in specific subtypes of Covid-19 patients and indicates machine learning as a useful approach to identify the most "promising" patients in terms of success rate of this treatment. In the future, further studies on independent datasets are warranted, possibly using supervised ML techniques as in other clinical settings (e.g., [39,40]), to validate this hypothesis and test the feasibility of predicting responsiveness to HCQ before intervention. Ideally, a trial administering low dosages of HCQ (≤400 mg/day) and randomizing subjects based on their Covid-19 subtype profile rather than on single characteristics may be warranted to clarify the effects of HCQ on mortality risk in SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially within those patients with a "low risk" profile.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%