Evidence Hub

Prediction of Poststroke Urinary Tract Infection Risk in Immobile Patients Using Machine Learning: a observational cohort study

Chen Zhu, Zidu Xu, Yaowen Gu, Si Zheng, Xiangyu Sun, Jing Cao, Bao-yun Song, Jing-Fen Jin et al.

Journal of Hospital Infection, 2022

3,982 participants · 29 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is one of major nosocomial infections significantly affecting the outcomes of immobile stroke patients. Previous studies have identified several risk factors, but it's still challenging to accurately estimate personal UTI risk.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to develop predictive models for UTI risk identification for immobile stroke patients.

METHODS

Research data were collected from our previous multi-centre study. Derivation cohort included 3982 immobile stroke patients collected from November 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016; external validation cohort included 3837 patients collected from November 1, 2016 to July 30, 2017. 6 machine learning models and an ensemble learning model were derived based on 80% of derivation cohort and effectiveness was evaluated with the remaining 20%. We used Shapley additive explanation values to determine feature importance and examine the clinical significance of prediction models.

RESULTS

2.59% (103/3982) patients were diagnosed with UTI in derivation cohort, 1.38% (53/3837) in external cohort. The ensemble learning model performed the best in area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve in internal validation (82.2%); second best in external validation (80.8%). In addition, the ensemble learning model performed the best sensitivity in both internal and external validation sets (80.9% and 81.1%, respectively). We also identified seven UTI risk factors (pneumonia, glucocorticoid use, female sex, mixed…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 3,982 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free