Training and testing of a gradient boosted machine learning model to predict adverse outcome in patients presenting to emergency departments with suspected covid-19 infection in a middle-income setting.
Journal
PLOS digital health
ISSN: 2767-3170
Titre abrégé: PLOS Digit Health
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9918335064206676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
04
01
2023
accepted:
27
06
2023
medline:
20
9
2023
pubmed:
20
9
2023
entrez:
20
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
COVID-19 infection rates remain high in South Africa. Clinical prediction models may be helpful for rapid triage, and supporting clinical decision making, for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection. The Western Cape, South Africa, has integrated electronic health care data facilitating large-scale linked routine datasets. The aim of this study was to develop a machine learning model to predict adverse outcome in patients presenting with suspected COVID-19 suitable for use in a middle-income setting. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using linked, routine data, from patients presenting with suspected COVID-19 infection to public-sector emergency departments (EDs) in the Western Cape, South Africa between 27th August 2020 and 31st October 2021. The primary outcome was death or critical care admission at 30 days. An XGBoost machine learning model was trained and internally tested using split-sample validation. External validation was performed in 3 test cohorts: Western Cape patients presenting during the Omicron COVID-19 wave, a UK cohort during the ancestral COVID-19 wave, and a Sudanese cohort during ancestral and Eta waves. A total of 282,051 cases were included in a complete case training dataset. The prevalence of 30-day adverse outcome was 4.0%. The most important features for predicting adverse outcome were the requirement for supplemental oxygen, peripheral oxygen saturations, level of consciousness and age. Internal validation using split-sample test data revealed excellent discrimination (C-statistic 0.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.91) and calibration (CITL of 1.05). The model achieved C-statistics of 0.84 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.85), 0.72 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.73), and 0.62, (95% CI 0.59 to 0.65) in the Omicron, UK, and Sudanese test cohorts. Results were materially unchanged in sensitivity analyses examining missing data. An XGBoost machine learning model achieved good discrimination and calibration in prediction of adverse outcome in patients presenting with suspected COVID19 to Western Cape EDs. Performance was reduced in temporal and geographical external validation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37729117
doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000309
pii: PDIG-D-23-00004
pmc: PMC10511129
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e0000309Subventions
Organisme : Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
ID : INV-017293
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : U01 AI069911
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 HD080465
Pays : United States
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
ID : INV-004657
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Fuller et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021 Mar 30;11:596201
pubmed: 33859951
Ann Emerg Med. 2022 Jul;80(1):12-19
pubmed: 35339284
JAMA. 2018 Apr 3;319(13):1317-1318
pubmed: 29532063
Semin Nucl Med. 1978 Oct;8(4):283-98
pubmed: 112681
Virulence. 2021 Dec;12(1):507-508
pubmed: 33494661
Front Genet. 2022 Feb 23;13:836798
pubmed: 35281805
Global Health. 2020 Jun 24;16(1):52
pubmed: 32580741
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 16;15(12):e0244051
pubmed: 33326502
F1000Res. 2020 Sep 9;9:1107
pubmed: 33163160
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022 Aug 16;29(9):1525-1534
pubmed: 35686364
Emerg Med J. 2022 Dec;39(12):918-923
pubmed: 35944968
J Healthc Inform Res. 2022 Feb 11;6(2):228-239
pubmed: 35194568
Elife. 2022 Aug 09;11:
pubmed: 35943138
Nat Methods. 2021 Oct;18(10):1122-1127
pubmed: 34316068
S Afr Med J. 2022 Feb 01;112(2):13496
pubmed: 35139985
Stat Med. 2021 Aug 30;40(19):4230-4251
pubmed: 34031906
JAMA Surg. 2021 Jul 1;156(7):675-676
pubmed: 33825807
J Biomed Inform. 2020 Dec;112:103611
pubmed: 33157313
Emerg Med J. 2023 Jul;40(7):509-517
pubmed: 37217302
Ann Glob Health. 2021 Mar 26;87(1):31
pubmed: 33816136
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 22;16(1):e0245840
pubmed: 33481930
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jul 10;21(7):e13659
pubmed: 31293245
PLoS Med. 2015 Oct 06;12(10):e1001885
pubmed: 26440803
BMJ. 2016 Jun 22;353:i3139
pubmed: 27334281
Emerg Med J. 2006 Feb;23(2):149-53
pubmed: 16439753
Ann Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;70(3):338-344.e3
pubmed: 28238497
PLoS One. 2023 Jun 14;18(6):e0287091
pubmed: 37315048
Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2020 Nov-Dec;14(6):1809-1814
pubmed: 32956925
Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 21;12(1):1182
pubmed: 35064174
Neurol Clin. 2016 Nov;34(4):1127-1136
pubmed: 27719994
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2021 Jan 06;104(3_Suppl):3-11
pubmed: 33410394
BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 15;11(9):e046130
pubmed: 34526332
BMC Med. 2019 Dec 16;17(1):230
pubmed: 31842878
Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2020 Sep;57(6):365-388
pubmed: 32645276
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2022 Dec 31;18(1):2034457
pubmed: 35240908