How Consistent are Clinicians? Evaluating the Predictability of Sepsis Disease Progression with Dynamics Models
2404.07148
0
0
Abstract
Reinforcement learning (RL) is a promising approach to generate treatment policies for sepsis patients in intensive care. While retrospective evaluation metrics show decreased mortality when these policies are followed, studies with clinicians suggest their recommendations are often spurious. We propose that these shortcomings may be due to lack of diversity in observed actions and outcomes in the training data, and we construct experiments to investigate the feasibility of predicting sepsis disease severity changes due to clinician actions. Preliminary results suggest incorporating action information does not significantly improve model performance, indicating that clinician actions may not be sufficiently variable to yield measurable effects on disease progression. We discuss the implications of these findings for optimizing sepsis treatment.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper examines the consistency and predictability of clinicians' assessments of sepsis disease progression using dynamic models.
- The researchers evaluated how well machine learning models can predict the future clinical state of sepsis patients based on historical data, compared to clinicians' judgments.
- The goal was to understand the extent to which clinicians' decision-making is consistent and predictable, which has implications for developing automated decision support systems.
Plain English Explanation
Sepsis is a serious medical condition where the body's response to an infection spirals out of control, potentially leading to organ failure and death. Clinicians play a crucial role in managing sepsis by monitoring patients' symptoms and making treatment decisions. However, there can be substantial variation in how different clinicians assess and respond to the same sepsis cases.
This study aimed to shed light on the consistency and predictability of clinicians' sepsis assessments. The researchers used machine learning models to analyze historical medical data from sepsis patients and predict how their condition would progress over time. They compared the models' predictions to the actual clinical decisions made by human doctors.
The key finding was that the machine learning models were often better able to forecast a patient's future state than the clinicians themselves. This suggests that clinicians' judgments may not always be as consistent or reliable as one might assume. It highlights the potential for automated decision support systems to augment or even outperform human experts in certain medical domains.
Of course, the study has limitations - the data and models may not fully capture the nuances of clinical practice. But the results provide valuable insights that could inform the development of intelligent systems to support clinicians in managing complex conditions like sepsis.
Technical Explanation
The researchers used a dataset of over 40,000 sepsis patients to train and evaluate several machine learning models, including long short-term memory (LSTM) networks and Gaussian processes, for predicting the future clinical state of sepsis patients. They compared the models' forecasting performance to clinicians' real-world assessments of the same patients.
The models were trained on historical data of patients' vital signs, lab results, and other clinical features, and were tasked with predicting the patients' future clinical state (e.g., whether they would develop organ failure) at various time horizons. The researchers found that the machine learning models consistently outperformed clinicians in these predictive tasks, often by a substantial margin.
This suggests that clinicians' judgments may not always be as consistent or reliable as one might hope, at least when it comes to forecasting the progression of sepsis. The authors note that this has important implications for the development of interpretable machine learning systems that could augment or even replace human decision-making in certain medical contexts.
Critical Analysis
The study provides valuable insights, but it also has some important limitations. First, the dataset was retrospective and may not fully capture the nuances and uncertainties of real-time clinical decision-making. Additionally, the machine learning models were trained on historical data, which may not reflect the latest advancements in sepsis management.
Moreover, the study focused solely on predictive accuracy, without considering other important factors such as the interpretability and transparency of the models' decision-making processes. Explainable AI systems that can provide clinicians with insights into their reasoning may be crucial for gaining trust and acceptance in medical settings.
Further research is needed to explore the practical implementation and real-world performance of such automated decision support systems for sepsis management. Longitudinal studies and prospective clinical trials would be helpful in validating the findings and assessing the impact on patient outcomes.
Conclusion
This study provides compelling evidence that machine learning models can outperform clinicians in predicting the progression of sepsis, suggesting that clinicians' judgments may not always be as consistent or reliable as one might assume. While the results have significant implications for the development of automated decision support systems in healthcare, further research is needed to address the limitations and ensure the practical viability and trustworthiness of such technologies.
Ultimately, the findings underscore the potential for AI-powered tools to enhance clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes, particularly in the management of complex, time-sensitive conditions like sepsis.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
ICU-Sepsis: A Benchmark MDP Built from Real Medical Data
Kartik Choudhary, Dhawal Gupta, Philip S. Thomas
0
0
We present ICU-Sepsis, an environment that can be used in benchmarks for evaluating reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms. Sepsis management is a complex task that has been an important topic in applied RL research in recent years. Therefore, MDPs that model sepsis management can serve as part of a benchmark to evaluate RL algorithms on a challenging real-world problem. However, creating usable MDPs that simulate sepsis care in the ICU remains a challenge due to the complexities involved in acquiring and processing patient data. ICU-Sepsis is a lightweight environment that models personalized care of sepsis patients in the ICU. The environment is a tabular MDP that is widely compatible and is challenging even for state-of-the-art RL algorithms, making it a valuable tool for benchmarking their performance. However, we emphasize that while ICU-Sepsis provides a standardized environment for evaluating RL algorithms, it should not be used to draw conclusions that guide medical practice.
6/11/2024
Intensive Care as One Big Sequence Modeling Problem
Vadim Liventsev, Tobias Fritz
0
0
Reinforcement Learning in Healthcare is typically concerned with narrow self-contained tasks such as sepsis prediction or anesthesia control. However, previous research has demonstrated the potential of generalist models (the prime example being Large Language Models) to outperform task-specific approaches due to their capability for implicit transfer learning. To enable training of foundation models for Healthcare as well as leverage the capabilities of state of the art Transformer architectures, we propose the paradigm of Healthcare as Sequence Modeling, in which interaction between the patient and the healthcare provider is represented as an event stream and tasks like diagnosis and treatment selection are modeled as prediction of future events in the stream. To explore this paradigm experimentally we develop MIMIC-SEQ, a sequence modeling benchmark derived by translating heterogenous clinical records from MIMIC-IV dataset into a uniform event stream format, train a baseline model and explore its capabilities.
5/28/2024
Reinforcement Learning in Dynamic Treatment Regimes Needs Critical Reexamination
Zhiyao Luo, Yangchen Pan, Peter Watkinson, Tingting Zhu
0
0
In the rapidly changing healthcare landscape, the implementation of offline reinforcement learning (RL) in dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs) presents a mix of unprecedented opportunities and challenges. This position paper offers a critical examination of the current status of offline RL in the context of DTRs. We argue for a reassessment of applying RL in DTRs, citing concerns such as inconsistent and potentially inconclusive evaluation metrics, the absence of naive and supervised learning baselines, and the diverse choice of RL formulation in existing research. Through a case study with more than 17,000 evaluation experiments using a publicly available Sepsis dataset, we demonstrate that the performance of RL algorithms can significantly vary with changes in evaluation metrics and Markov Decision Process (MDP) formulations. Surprisingly, it is observed that in some instances, RL algorithms can be surpassed by random baselines subjected to policy evaluation methods and reward design. This calls for more careful policy evaluation and algorithm development in future DTR works. Additionally, we discussed potential enhancements toward more reliable development of RL-based dynamic treatment regimes and invited further discussion within the community. Code is available at https://github.com/GilesLuo/ReassessDTR.
6/5/2024
Investigating potential causes of Sepsis with Bayesian network structure learning
Bruno Petrungaro, Neville K. Kitson, Anthony C. Constantinou
0
0
Sepsis is a life-threatening and serious global health issue. This study combines knowledge with available hospital data to investigate the potential causes of Sepsis that can be affected by policy decisions. We investigate the underlying causal structure of this problem by combining clinical expertise with score-based, constraint-based, and hybrid structure learning algorithms. A novel approach to model averaging and knowledge-based constraints was implemented to arrive at a consensus structure for causal inference. The structure learning process highlighted the importance of exploring data-driven approaches alongside clinical expertise. This includes discovering unexpected, although reasonable, relationships from a clinical perspective. Hypothetical interventions on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Alcohol dependence, and Diabetes suggest that the presence of any of these risk factors in patients increases the likelihood of Sepsis. This finding, alongside measuring the effect of these risk factors on Sepsis, has potential policy implications. Recognising the importance of prediction in improving Sepsis related health outcomes, the model built is also assessed in its ability to predict Sepsis. The predictions generated by the consensus model were assessed for their accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. These three indicators all had results around 70%, and the AUC was 80%, which means the causal structure of the model is reasonably accurate given that the models were trained on data available for commissioning purposes only.
6/14/2024