Key result
An XGBoost machine learning model accurately predicted the need for an ECG at emergency department triage, achieving an AUC of 0.891 in test cohort 1 and 0.885 in test cohort 2.
Why the study?
Identifying the need for ECG examination early in emergency department triage is essential for timely artificial intelligence-assisted analysis.
Does a machine learning model accurately predict the need for ECG acquisition in emergency department triage patients?
Observational (n=301,658)
No
Does a machine learning model accurately predict the need for ECG acquisition in emergency department triage patients?
A machine learning model using triage data can accurately predict whether emergency department patients require an ECG, enabling earlier diagnosis and decision-making.
May aid ED triage for ECG; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
The machine learning-assisted electrocardiogram (ECG) is increasingly recognized for its unprecedented capabilities in diagnosing and predicting cardiovascular diseases. Identifying the need for ECG examination early in emergency department (ED) triage is key to timely artificial intelligence-assisted analysis. We used machine learning to develop and validate a clinical decision support tool to predict ED triage patients' need for ECG. Data from 301,658 ED visits from August 2017 to November 2020 in a tertiary hospital were divided into a development cohort, validation cohort, and two test cohorts that included admissions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Models were developed using logistic regression, decision tree, random forest, and XGBoost methods. Their areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs), positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs) were compared and validated. In the validation cohort, the AUCs were 0.887 for the XGBoost model, 0.885 for the logistic regression model, 0.878 for the random forest model, and 0.845 for the decision tree model. The XGBoost model was selected for subsequent application. In test cohort 1, the AUC was 0.891, with sensitivity of 0.812, specificity of 0.814, PPV of 0.708 and NPV of 0.886. In test cohort 2, the AUC was 0.885, with sensitivity of 0.816, specificity of 0.812, PPV of 0.659, and NPV of 0.908. In the cumulative incidence analysis, patients not receiving an ECG yet positively predicted by the model had significantly higher probability of receiving the examination within 48 h compared with those negatively predicted by the model. A machine learning model based on triage datasets was developed to predict ECG acquisition with high accuracy. The ECG recommendation can effectively predict whether patients presenting at ED triage will require an ECG, prompting subsequent analysis and decision-making in the ED.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tsai et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Need for electrocardiogram at emergency department triage (n=301,658). XGBoost machine learning model vs. Logistic regression, decision tree, and random forest models was evaluated on Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for predicting the need for an ECG. An XGBoost machine learning model accurately predicted the need for an ECG at emergency department triage, achieving an AUC of 0.891 in test cohort 1 and 0.885 in test cohort 2.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: