• Critical care medicine · Feb 2001

    Comparative Study

    Predicting hospital mortality for patients in the intensive care unit: a comparison of artificial neural networks with logistic regression models.

    • G Clermont, D C Angus, S M DiRusso, M Griffin, and W T Linde-Zwirble.
    • Critical Care Medicine Division, the Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, and the Center for Research on Health Care, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
    • Crit. Care Med. 2001 Feb 1;29(2):291-6.

    ObjectiveLogistic regression (LR), commonly used for hospital mortality prediction, has limitations. Artificial neural networks (ANNs) have been proposed as an alternative. We compared the performance of these approaches by using stepwise reductions in sample size.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingSeven intensive care units (ICU) at one tertiary care center.PatientsPatients were 1,647 ICU admissions for whom first-day Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III variables were collected.InterventionsNone.Measurements And Main ResultsWe constructed LR and ANN models on a random set of 1,200 admissions (development set) and used the remaining 447 as the validation set. We repeated model construction on progressively smaller development sets (800, 400, and 200 admissions) and retested on the original validation set (n = 447). For each development set, we constructed models from two LR and two ANN architectures, organizing the independent variables differently. With the 1,200-admission development set, all models had good fit and discrimination on the validation set, where fit was assessed by the Hosmer-Lemeshow C statistic (range, 10.6-15.3; p > or = .05) and standardized mortality ratio (SMR) (range, 0.93 [95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.15] to 1.09 [95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.38]), and discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (range, 0.80-0.84). As development set sample size decreased, model performance on the validation set deteriorated rapidly, although the ANNs retained marginally better fit at 800 (best C statistic was 26.3 [p = .0009] and 13.1 [p = .11] for the LR and ANN models). Below 800, fit was poor with both approaches, with high C statistics (ranging from 22.8 [p <.004] to 633 [p <.0001]) and highly biased SMRs (seven of the eight models below 800 had SMRs of <0.85, with an upper confidence interval of <1). Discrimination ranged from 0.74 to 0.84 below 800.ConclusionsWhen sample size is adequate, LR and ANN models have similar performance. However, development sets of < or = 800 were generally inadequate. This is concerning, given typical sample sizes used for individual ICU mortality prediction.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.