Prediction performance of the machine learning model in predicting mortality risk in patients with traumatic brain injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:4
|
作者
Wang, Jue [1 ]
Yin, Ming Jing [1 ]
Wen, Han Chun [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Guangxi Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Emergency, Nanning 530021, Guangxi, Peoples R China
[2] Guangxi Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Intens Care Dept, Ward 1,6 Shuangyong Rd, Nanning, Guangxi, Peoples R China
关键词
Machine learning; Traumatic brain injury; Meta-analysis; Prediction; Mortality rate; Systematic review; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL-NETWORK; DECISION-TREE ANALYSIS; IN-HOSPITAL MORTALITY; GLASGOW COMA SCALE; EXTERNAL VALIDATION; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; REGRESSION-MODELS; IMPACT; CRASH; VARIABLES;
D O I
10.1186/s12911-023-02247-8
中图分类号
R-058 [];
学科分类号
摘要
PurposeWith the in-depth application of machine learning(ML) in clinical practice, it has been used to predict the mortality risk in patients with traumatic brain injuries(TBI). However, there are disputes over its predictive accuracy. Therefore, we implemented this systematic review and meta-analysis, to explore the predictive value of ML for TBI.MethodologyWe systematically retrieved literature published in PubMed, Embase.com, Cochrane, and Web of Science as of November 27, 2022. The prediction model risk of bias(ROB) assessment tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the ROB of models and the applicability of reviewed questions. The random-effects model was adopted for the meta-analysis of the C-index and accuracy of ML models, and a bivariate mixed-effects model for the meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity.ResultA total of 47 papers were eligible, including 156 model, with 122 newly developed ML models and 34 clinically recommended mature tools. There were 98 ML models predicting the in-hospital mortality in patients with TBI; the pooled C-index, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.87), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.82), and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86, 0.92), respectively. There were 24 ML models predicting the out-of-hospital mortality; the pooled C-index, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.85), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.67, 0.81), and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.82), respectively. According to multivariate analysis, GCS score, age, CT classification, pupil size/light reflex, glucose, and systolic blood pressure (SBP) exerted the greatest impact on the model performance.ConclusionAccording to the systematic review and meta-analysis, ML models are relatively accurate in predicting the mortality of TBI. A single model often outperforms traditional scoring tools, but the pooled accuracy of models is close to that of traditional scoring tools. The key factors related to model performance include the accepted clinical variables of TBI and the use of CT imaging.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] IS TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY A RISK FACTOR FOR PSYCHOSIS? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
    Molloy, Charlene
    Conroy, Ronan
    Connor, Dearbhla
    Cotter, David
    Cannon, Mary
    SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH, 2010, 117 (2-3) : 194 - 195
  • [42] Risk of Epilepsy Following Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Sui, Songtao
    Sun, Jinbo
    Chen, Xiqi
    Fan, Feng
    JOURNAL OF HEAD TRAUMA REHABILITATION, 2023, 38 (04) : E289 - E298
  • [43] Risk of stroke after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Karamian, Armin
    Farzaneh, Hana
    Khoshnoodi, Masoud
    Hosseini, Najmeh
    Taheri, Mojtaba
    Lucke-Wold, Brandon
    ACTA NEUROLOGICA BELGICA, 2024,
  • [44] Stroke risk following traumatic brain injury: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Turner, Grace M.
    McMullan, Christel
    Aiyegbusi, Olalekan Lee
    Bem, Danai
    Marshall, Tom
    Calvert, Melanie
    Mant, Jonathan
    Belli, Antonio
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STROKE, 2021, 16 (04) : 370 - 384
  • [45] Machine learning approaches for risk prediction after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zaka, Ammar
    Mutahar, Daud
    Gorcilov, James
    Gupta, Aashray K.
    Kovoor, Joshua G.
    Stretton, Brandon
    Mridha, Naim
    Sivagangabalan, Gopal
    Thiagalingam, Aravinda
    Chow, Clara K.
    Zaman, Sarah
    Jayasinghe, Rohan
    Kovoor, Pramesh
    Bacchi, Stephen
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL - DIGITAL HEALTH, 2024, 6 (01): : 23 - 44
  • [46] Machine learning models for risk prediction of cancer-associated thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chen, Keya
    Zhang, Ying
    Zhang, Lufang
    Zhang, Wei
    Chen, Yu
    JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2025, 23 (02) : 610 - 626
  • [47] Machine learning in the prediction of depression treatment outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Sajjadian, Mehri
    Lam, Raymond W.
    Milev, Roumen
    Rotzinger, Susan
    Frey, Benicio N.
    Soares, Claudio N.
    Parikh, Sagar V.
    Foster, Jane A.
    Turecki, Gustavo
    Muller, Daniel J.
    Strother, Stephen C.
    Farzan, Faranak
    Kennedy, Sidney H.
    Uher, Rudolf
    PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE, 2021, 51 (16) : 2742 - 2751
  • [48] Systematic review and network meta-analysis of machine learning algorithms in sepsis prediction
    Gao, Yulei
    Wang, Chaolan
    Shen, Jiaxin
    Wang, Ziyi
    Liu, Yancun
    Chai, Yanfen
    EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2024, 245
  • [49] Performance of Machine Learning for Tissue Outcome Prediction in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Wang, Xinrui
    Fan, Yiming
    Zhang, Nan
    Li, Jing
    Duan, Yang
    Yang, Benqiang
    FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY, 2022, 13
  • [50] A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Grey Matter Volumetric Changes in Mild Traumatic Brain Injuries
    Mavroudis, Ioannis
    Chatzikonstantinou, Symela
    Ciobica, Alin
    Balmus, Ioana-Miruna
    Iordache, Alin
    Kazis, Dimitrios
    Chowdhury, Rumana
    Luca, Alina-Costina
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2022, 12 (19):