Scholarlink

Background <p>Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are preventable hospital-acquired infections. Predicting CLABSI helps improve early intervention strategies and enhance patient safety.</p> Aim <p>To develop and temporally evaluate dynamic prediction models for continuous CLABSI risk monitoring.</p> Methods <p>Data from hospitalized patients with central catheter(s) admitted to University Hospitals Leuven between 2014 and 2017 were used to develop five dynamic models (a landmark cause-specific model, two random forest models, and two XGBoost models) to predict 7-day CLABSI risk, accounting for competing events (death, discharge, and catheter removal). The models’ predictions were then combined using a superlearner model. All models were temporally evaluated on data from the same hospital from 2018 to 2020 using performance metrics for discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility.</p> Findings <p>Among 61629 catheter episodes in the training set, 1930 (3.1%) resulted in CLABSI, while in the test set of 44544 catheter episodes, 1059 (2.4%) experienced CLABSI.</p> <p>Among individual models, one XGBoost model achieved the highest AUROC of 0.748. Calibration was good for predicted risks up to 5%, while the cause-specific and XGBoost models overestimated higher predicted risks. The superlearner displayed a modest improvement in discrimination (AUROC up to 0.751) and better calibration than the cause-specific and XGBoost models, but worse than the random forest models. The models showed clinical utility to support standard care interventions (at risk thresholds between 0.5–4%), but not to support advanced interventions (at thresholds 15–25%).</p> Conclusion <p>Hospital-wide CLABSI prediction models offer clinical utility based on medium-risk thresholds. Clinical utility at present may be limited as the model performance deteriorated over time.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Hospital-wide, dynamic, individualized prediction of central line-associated bloodstream infections-development and temporal evaluation of six prediction models

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月24日

查看全文
  • Elena Albu,
  • Shan Gao,
  • Pieter Stijnen,
  • Frank E. Rademakers,
  • Christel Janssens,
  • Veerle Cossey,
  • Yves Debaveye,
  • Laure Wynants,
  • Ben Van Calster

摘要

Background

Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are preventable hospital-acquired infections. Predicting CLABSI helps improve early intervention strategies and enhance patient safety.

Aim

To develop and temporally evaluate dynamic prediction models for continuous CLABSI risk monitoring.

Methods

Data from hospitalized patients with central catheter(s) admitted to University Hospitals Leuven between 2014 and 2017 were used to develop five dynamic models (a landmark cause-specific model, two random forest models, and two XGBoost models) to predict 7-day CLABSI risk, accounting for competing events (death, discharge, and catheter removal). The models’ predictions were then combined using a superlearner model. All models were temporally evaluated on data from the same hospital from 2018 to 2020 using performance metrics for discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility.

Findings

Among 61629 catheter episodes in the training set, 1930 (3.1%) resulted in CLABSI, while in the test set of 44544 catheter episodes, 1059 (2.4%) experienced CLABSI.

Among individual models, one XGBoost model achieved the highest AUROC of 0.748. Calibration was good for predicted risks up to 5%, while the cause-specific and XGBoost models overestimated higher predicted risks. The superlearner displayed a modest improvement in discrimination (AUROC up to 0.751) and better calibration than the cause-specific and XGBoost models, but worse than the random forest models. The models showed clinical utility to support standard care interventions (at risk thresholds between 0.5–4%), but not to support advanced interventions (at thresholds 15–25%).

Conclusion

Hospital-wide CLABSI prediction models offer clinical utility based on medium-risk thresholds. Clinical utility at present may be limited as the model performance deteriorated over time.