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.

The flow chart of this study.

A. Screening Process for MIMIC-IV. B. Screening Process for MIMIC-III.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of the cohort from MIMIC-IV.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Feature coefficients.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

ROC curves of the predictive model.

A. Internal validation set. B. External validation set.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Compared performance evaluation of 8 machine learning classification models in predicting 28-day mortality rate in the internal validation set.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 4.

DCA curves of the top three best-performing models.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

ROC curves of the random forest and traditional disease severity scores.

A. Internal validation set. B. External validation set.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 3.

Compared performance evaluation of random forest and traditional disease severity scores in predicting 28-day mortality rate in the internal validation set.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Compared performance of the random forest model before and after hyperparameter tuning.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 6.

SHAP summary chart.

A. SHAP values showing the influence of different features on the output of RF Model. B. Mean absolute SHAP values for each clinical feature.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

SHAP dependency plot of the top 5 influential clinical features on model outcomes.

A. Urine output; B. CCI; C. GCS_min; D. BUN; E. Admission_age.

More »

Fig 7 Expand