Cargando…

Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal

BACKGROUND: The number of studies applying machine learning (ML) to predict acute kidney injury (AKI) has grown steadily over the past decade. We assess and critically appraise the state of the art in ML models for AKI prediction, considering performance, methodological soundness, and applicability....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vagliano, Iacopo, Chesnaye, Nicholas C, Leopold, Jan Hendrik, Jager, Kitty J, Abu-Hanna, Ameen, Schut, Martijn C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9664575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36381375
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfac181
_version_ 1784831130409631744
author Vagliano, Iacopo
Chesnaye, Nicholas C
Leopold, Jan Hendrik
Jager, Kitty J
Abu-Hanna, Ameen
Schut, Martijn C
author_facet Vagliano, Iacopo
Chesnaye, Nicholas C
Leopold, Jan Hendrik
Jager, Kitty J
Abu-Hanna, Ameen
Schut, Martijn C
author_sort Vagliano, Iacopo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The number of studies applying machine learning (ML) to predict acute kidney injury (AKI) has grown steadily over the past decade. We assess and critically appraise the state of the art in ML models for AKI prediction, considering performance, methodological soundness, and applicability. METHODS: We searched PubMed and ArXiv, extracted data, and critically appraised studies based on the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD), Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS), and Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) guidelines. RESULTS: Forty-six studies from 3166 titles were included. Thirty-eight studies developed a model, five developed and externally validated one, and three studies externally validated one. Flexible ML methods were used more often than deep learning, although the latter was common with temporal variables and text as predictors. Predictive performance showed an area under receiver operating curves ranging from 0.49 to 0.99. Our critical appraisal identified a high risk of bias in 39 studies. Some studies lacked internal validation, whereas external validation and interpretability of results were rarely considered. Fifteen studies focused on AKI prediction in the intensive care setting, and the US-derived Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) data set was commonly used. Reproducibility was limited as data and code were usually unavailable. CONCLUSIONS: Flexible ML methods are popular for the prediction of AKI, although more complex models based on deep learning are emerging. Our critical appraisal identified a high risk of bias in most models: Studies should use calibration measures and external validation more often, improve model interpretability, and share data and code to improve reproducibility.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9664575
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96645752022-11-14 Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal Vagliano, Iacopo Chesnaye, Nicholas C Leopold, Jan Hendrik Jager, Kitty J Abu-Hanna, Ameen Schut, Martijn C Clin Kidney J Original Article BACKGROUND: The number of studies applying machine learning (ML) to predict acute kidney injury (AKI) has grown steadily over the past decade. We assess and critically appraise the state of the art in ML models for AKI prediction, considering performance, methodological soundness, and applicability. METHODS: We searched PubMed and ArXiv, extracted data, and critically appraised studies based on the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD), Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS), and Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) guidelines. RESULTS: Forty-six studies from 3166 titles were included. Thirty-eight studies developed a model, five developed and externally validated one, and three studies externally validated one. Flexible ML methods were used more often than deep learning, although the latter was common with temporal variables and text as predictors. Predictive performance showed an area under receiver operating curves ranging from 0.49 to 0.99. Our critical appraisal identified a high risk of bias in 39 studies. Some studies lacked internal validation, whereas external validation and interpretability of results were rarely considered. Fifteen studies focused on AKI prediction in the intensive care setting, and the US-derived Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) data set was commonly used. Reproducibility was limited as data and code were usually unavailable. CONCLUSIONS: Flexible ML methods are popular for the prediction of AKI, although more complex models based on deep learning are emerging. Our critical appraisal identified a high risk of bias in most models: Studies should use calibration measures and external validation more often, improve model interpretability, and share data and code to improve reproducibility. Oxford University Press 2022-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9664575/ /pubmed/36381375 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfac181 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the ERA. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Original Article
Vagliano, Iacopo
Chesnaye, Nicholas C
Leopold, Jan Hendrik
Jager, Kitty J
Abu-Hanna, Ameen
Schut, Martijn C
Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
title Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
title_full Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
title_fullStr Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
title_full_unstemmed Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
title_short Machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
title_sort machine learning models for predicting acute kidney injury: a systematic review and critical appraisal
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9664575/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36381375
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfac181
work_keys_str_mv AT vaglianoiacopo machinelearningmodelsforpredictingacutekidneyinjuryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal
AT chesnayenicholasc machinelearningmodelsforpredictingacutekidneyinjuryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal
AT leopoldjanhendrik machinelearningmodelsforpredictingacutekidneyinjuryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal
AT jagerkittyj machinelearningmodelsforpredictingacutekidneyinjuryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal
AT abuhannaameen machinelearningmodelsforpredictingacutekidneyinjuryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal
AT schutmartijnc machinelearningmodelsforpredictingacutekidneyinjuryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal