Early prediction of ventilator-associated pneumonia with machine learning models: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prediction model performance✰.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning-based prediction models can catalog, classify, and correlate large amounts of multimodal data to aid clinicians at diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic levels. Early prediction of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) may accelerate the diagnosis and guide preventive interventions. The performance of a variety of machine learning-based prediction models were analyzed among adults undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration. Machine learning-based prediction models were identified from a search of nine multi-disciplinary databases. Two authors independently selected and extracted data using predefined criteria and data extraction forms. The predictive performance, the interpretability, the technological readiness level, and the risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated. RESULTS: Final analysis included 10 static prediction models using supervised learning. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, sensitivity, and specificity for VAP were 0.88 (95 % CI 0.82-0.94, I2 98.4 %), 0.72 (95 % CI 0.45-0.98, I2 97.4 %) and 0.90 (95 % CI 0.85-0.94, I2 97.9 %), respectively. All included studies had either a high or unclear risk of bias without significant improvements in applicability. The care-related risk factors for the best performing models were the duration of mechanical ventilation, the length of ICU stay, blood transfusion, nutrition strategy, and the presence of antibiotics. CONCLUSION: A variety of the prediction models, prediction intervals, and prediction windows were identified to facilitate timely diagnosis. In addition, care-related risk factors susceptible for preventive interventions were identified. In future, there is a need for dynamic machine learning models using time-depended predictors in conjunction with feature importance of the models to predict real-time risk of VAP and related outcomes to optimize bundled care.

Diagnostic and prognostic prediction models in ventilator-associated pneumonia: Systematic review and meta-analysis of prediction modelling studies.

PURPOSE: Existing expert systems have not improved the diagnostic accuracy of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The aim of this systematic literature review was to review and summarize state-of-the-art prediction models detecting or predicting VAP from exhaled breath, patient reports and demographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: Both diagnostic and prognostic prediction models were searched from a representative list of multidisciplinary databases. An extensive list of validated search terms was added to the search to cover papers failing to mention predictive research in their title or abstract. Two authors independently selected studies, while three authors extracted data using predefined criteria and data extraction forms. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess both the risk of bias and the applicability of the prediction modelling studies. Technology readiness was also assessed. RESULTS: Out of 2052 identified studies, 20 were included. Fourteen (70%) studies reported the predictive performance of diagnostic models to detect VAP from exhaled human breath with a high degree of sensitivity and a moderate specificity. In addition, the majority of them were validated on a realistic dataset. The rest of the studies reported the predictive performance of diagnostic and prognostic prediction models to detect VAP from unstructured narratives [2 (10%)] as well as baseline demographics and clinical characteristics [4 (20%)]. All studies, however, had either a high or unclear risk of bias without significant improvements in applicability. CONCLUSIONS: The development and deployment of prediction modelling studies are limited in VAP and related outcomes. More computational, translational, and clinical research is needed to bring these tools from the bench to the bedside. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020180218, registered on 05-07-2020.