1. Real‐time interactive artificial intelligence of things–based prediction for adverse outcomes in adult patients with pneumonia in the emergency department
- Author
-
Jhi-Joung Wang, Chien-Chin Hsu, Tzu-Lan Liu, You-Ming Chen, Yu-Shan Ma, Shu-Lien Hsu, Hung-Jung Lin, Chia-Jung Chen, Chien-Cheng Huang, Chung-Feng Liu, Yuan Kao, and Yu-Ting Shen
- Subjects
Adult ,Septic shock ,business.industry ,Medical record ,Pneumonia severity index ,Pneumonia ,General Medicine ,Emergency department ,medicine.disease ,Logistic regression ,Random forest ,Logistic Models ,Artificial Intelligence ,Emergency Medicine ,medicine ,Humans ,Artificial intelligence ,Gradient boosting ,Emergency Service, Hospital ,business ,Retrospective Studies - Abstract
Background Artificial intelligence of things (AIoT) may be a solution for predicting adverse outcomes in emergency department (ED) patients with pneumonia; however, this issue remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted this study to clarify it. Methods We identified 52,626 adult ED patients with pneumonia from three hospitals between 2010 and 2019 for this study. Thirty-three feature variables from electronic medical records were used to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict sepsis or septic shock, respiratory failure, and mortality. After comparisons of the predictive accuracies among logistic regression, random forest, support-vector machine (SVM), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), multilayer perceptron (MLP), and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), we selected the best one to build the model. We further combined the AI model with the Internet of things as AIoT, added an interactive mode, and implemented it in the hospital information system to assist clinicians with decision making in real time. We also compared the AIoT-based model with the confusion-urea-respiratory rate-blood pressure-65 (CURB-65) and pneumonia severity index (PSI) for predicting mortality. Results The best AI algorithms were random forest for sepsis or septic shock (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.781), LightGBM for respiratory failure (AUC = 0.847), and mortality (AUC = 0.835). The AIoT-based model represented better performance than CURB-65 and PSI indicators for predicting mortality (0.835 vs. 0.681 and 0.835 vs. 0.728). Conclusions A real-time interactive AIoT-based model might be a better tool for predicting adverse outcomes in ED patients with pneumonia. Further validation in other populations is warranted.
- Published
- 2021