Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Pre-incision variables chosen for predictive analytical modeling from a data base of 185 cardiac surgical patients.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

ALM Fractional Contributions to the Final Correlation with ICU LOS.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

The correlation between the t statistic and the fractional importance of the 8 pre-incision factors that had the strongest associations with ICU length of stay.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

A. ALM Training Model for Prediction of ICU LOS. The regression relationship between the predicted ICU length of stay from 8 pre-incision factors and the observed ICU length of stay from the training model generated by the SPSS Automatic Linear Modeling module. B. ALM Cross-Validated Predictions for ICU LOS.

The cross-validated result of the training model when applied to new ("untrained") patient data.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

The architecture of the typical neural network utilized in the SPSS Artificial Neural Network module for the 8 pre-incision factors.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

A. ANN Training Model for Prediction of ICU LOS. The regression relationship between the predicted ICU length of stay from 8 pre-incision factors and the observed ICU length of stay from the training model generated by the SPSS Artificial Neural Network module. B. ANN Prediction Results for ICU LOS for Untrained Data.

The cross-validated result of the training model when applied to new ("untrained") patient data.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

ANN Parameter Weights.

The prediction weights generated by the neural network for each interaction among the 8 pre-incision factors ("input layer") and the 4 nodes ("hidden layer"), and the output weights of each node to the prediction of ICU length of stay; bias weights are also contributed from the input layer and the hidden layer.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

The relative importance of the 8 pre-incision factors to the anticipation of ICU length of stay (generated from the Artificial Neural Network algorithm).

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 2.

Odds Ratios for Prediction that a Patient would have ICU LOS in the Upper Quartile of Observed Data from both the Trained and Cross-Validated ANN Analyses.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 8.

The Final Decision Tree Model that was Assessed for Prediction of ICU LOS.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

A. Decision Tree Training Model for Prediction of ICU LOS. The regression relationship between the predicted ICU length of stay from 7 pre-incision factors and the observed ICU length of stay from the training model generated by the SPSS Decision Tree module. B. Cross-Validated Predictions for ICU LOS.

The cross-validated result of the training model when applied to new ("untrained") patient data.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

A. Random Forest Training Model for Prediction of ICU LOS. The regression relationship between the predicted ICU length of stay from 8 pre-incision factors and the observed ICU length of stay from the training model. B. Cross-Validated Predictions for ICU LOS.

The cross-validated result of the training model when applied to new ("untrained") patient data.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Table 3.

Comparison of the Accuracies for the Four Models used to Predict ICU LOS.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Fractional Importance differences between ALM and ANN.

More »

Table 4 Expand