Popular Boards

Brian Murray, Bokai Zhao, Zhetao Chen | Pharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy | (2026)

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Prediction algorithms for prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) in the intensive care unit (ICU) have rarely incorporated detailed medication data, despite medications being important causal contributors to patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate PMV prediction models to assess the contribution of medication‐related variables alongside established physiologic predictors. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, models were developed using data from a random sample of 318 adults admitted to ICUs within the University of North Carolina (UNC) health system who received mechanical ventilation for ≥ 24 h from October 2015 to October 2020. Validation was performed in two datasets: a temporally distinct cohort from UNC from June 2021 to June 2023, and a cohort from Oregon Health Sciences University from June 2020 to June 2023. Logistic regression and supervised, classification‐based machine learning (ML) models [XGBoost, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM)] were trained on 30 demographic, clinical, laboratory, and medication‐related variables. The primary outcome was area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of developed prediction models for the occurrence of PMV. Results The base logistic regression model with medication regimen complexity and severity of illness data added was the best‐performing regression model, achieving an AUROC of 0.75. Random Forest and SVM ML models achieved AUROCs of 0.78. Model discrimination decreased modestly in external validation. Explainability analyses of ML models expectedly included severity of illness scores and respiratory indices among the most important features, but also consistently included the medication regimen complexity‐intensive care unit (MRC‐ICU) score and other medication metrics. Incorporation of medication data yielded modest improvements in overall discrimination and negative predictive value. Conclusions Medication‐related variables contributed incremental value to PMV prediction. ML methods provided marginal improvements over regression models. These findings highlight the potential value of medication data in prediction modeling for patient outcomes but emphasize the need to contextualize the value of complex models over simpler alternatives.

Tags

Sample Definition And Size

The study was a retrospective cohort of 318 adult ICU patients at the University of North Carolina health system who received mechanical ventilation for ≥ 24 hours between October 2015 and October 2020. Validation cohorts included a temporally distinct UNC cohort (June 2021–June 2023) and an external cohort from Oregon Health Sciences University (June 2020–June 2023) ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41495589/?utm_source=openai)).

Study Type

Retrospective cohort study using both traditional logistic regression and supervised machine learning models (XGBoost, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine) to predict prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41495589/?utm_source=openai)).

Conflicts Of Interest

No competing interests were declared in the preprint version of the study ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37790491/?utm_source=openai)). The published version does not list any conflicts of interest in the abstract or metadata available ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41495589/?utm_source=openai)).

Results Summary

Key findings: The logistic regression model incorporating medication regimen complexity (MRC‑ICU) and severity of illness achieved an AUROC of approximately 0.72–0.75, with high negative predictive value (NPV ~0.90–0.92) and positive predictive value (PPV ~0.83) ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37790491/?utm_source=openai)). Random Forest and SVM machine learning models achieved higher AUROCs (~0.78), with Random Forest showing balanced performance; SVM had lower accuracy due to class imbalance, which improved with oversampling ([pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10543219/?utm_source=openai)). Feature importance analyses consistently identified severity of illness scores, respiratory indices, and medication-related variables (including MRC‑ICU score) as top predictors ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41495589/?utm_source=openai)).

Referenced In

TLDR: When using AI models to predict ventilator outcomes, is medication a good predictor? Why does performance always seem to be capped around 0.80? Is this limit due to model choice, input data type, or simply irreducible noise when predicting across diverse ICU populations?


Machine Learning for Mechanical Ventilation

⸂⸂⸜(രᴗര๑)⸝⸃⸃ Hey everyone!! 👋 Biomed engineering PhD student here - Always interested in seeing new ways technology might contribute to the healthcare space. Anyways, this study here recently caught my attention, and I’m curious to hear your thoughts. 

During COVID-19, mechanical ventilation quickly became a hot topic. First thanks to global ventilator shortages and later due to the less than ideal outcomes from machine ventilation use. High mortality and complications like pneumonia raised an uncomfortable question: are we using mechanical ventilation for the right patients, at the right time, for the right duration?

To answer this question, many researchers have jumped onto the AI boat, leveraging  machine learning (ML) to analyze patient data. Several publications have emerged since then, such as:

  • Xu et al., 2024 used Random Forest to predict weaning difficulty in ventilated ICU patients, achieving 0.805 AUROC with 36 variables. 

  • Agard et al., 2025 : utilised a long short-term memory (LSTM) network. They predicted ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) 6 - 24 hours before it became clinically obvious and hit 94 - 96% AUPRC with 5 variables.

A new Pharmacotherapy study, Murray et al., 2026, also made use of the very popular Random Forest and SVM models, but took a different approach in terms of input variables, where medication regimen complexity was used as a predictor of prolonged ventilation (>5 days) in the ICU. 

  • The authors developed a “MRC-ICU” score to systematically quantify medication regimen complexity, assigning weighted values to 35 distinct medication categories, generating a total score. 

  • Their justification came from the fact: 70% of patients in the ICU are receiving more than 13 medications at any given time. 

  • Previously, medication data was rarely highlighted as a primary predictor, as:

    1. Medication data was difficult to compile and integrate. 

    2. Other papers evaluated medication to be non-significant

While the overall accuracy of Murray’s MRC-ICU model (~0.78 AUROC) is not dramatically higher than other existing models, the authors argued that their study differs in scope: it can predict over a broad ICU population rather than a narrowly defined cohort, like traumatic brain injury Prediction of in-hospital mortality in patients on mechanical ventilation post traumatic brain injury: machine learning approach or congestive heart failure Machine Learning-Based Model for Predicting Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure. They suggest that this model: may be best suited for identifying patients unlikely to require prolonged mechanical ventilation as opposed to confidently identifying patients at high risk.

👉 Performance gap: Model choice or Input Variable?

Thus far, many studies (including Xu et al., 2024 and Murray et al., 2026) using the traditional tree-based methods seem to hit a ~0.78-0.80 AUROC ceiling, while Agard's LSTM broke through to over 94% precision with just 5 variables

At face value, the advantage appears to be temporal awareness. Agard’s model was fed with 24-hour sequences of vital signs, capturing trends, volatility, and timing. But, it also brings forth the question:

Is this performance ceiling a limitation of tree-based architectures or simply a reflection of richer, more granular input data? 

At the same time, given the ‘just ok’ performance (~0.78 AUROC) for Murray’s model, I think there are, in fact, more underlying uncertainties:

  1. Is medication complexity genuinely useful and pulling its weight as a predictor?

  2. Is MRC-ICU just a proxy for disease severity, and is it a good one when predicting across diverse ICU populations?

  3. Are Random Forests becoming obsolete with all the new architecture available? Is it time to leave it behind?

(∿°○°)∿ Drop your thoughts!  What do you all think?

3