Hidden Markov Models for Sepsis Classification

Abstract Infection is not always clinically evident for early sepsis identification. Hidden Markov models (HMM) can help make inferences linking observed patient physiology to the unobserved sepsis state. 36 sepsis patient records were used to develop a HMM to model unobserved patient states, which were categorised by clinical review. A HMM was created with a two hidden state topology, an hourly transition matrix using the labelled data defined by independent (non-hierarchical) sepsis criteria, and class conditional observations defined by joint probability density profiles for cases and controls using kernel density estimates. The HMM made inferences about patient sepsis state, given the time series of observed clinical predictors. The model was updated recursively to provide a probability-based diagnosis of individual case histories. The test result was compared to the labelled patient record and diagnostic performance from the ROC curve was determined for both resubstitution (maximum performance) and repeated holdout (minimum performance) estimates. The HMM performed with 59–95% sensitivity, 61–96% specificity, 1.54–23.96 positive likelihood ratio, 0.05–0.66 negative likelihood ratio, 0.63–0.99 AUC, and 2–474 diagnostic odds ratio. This wide range of low to very high performance is conclusive, but clinically significant only towards best case performance levels, which would require a larger cohort than studied here. This HMM provides a next step in design and evaluation of bedside clinical markers for a probability-based sepsis diagnosis. Refining clinical predictor selection and clinical stage definitions with greater patient numbers would improve the model and its diagnostic performance.

[1]  Mitchell M. Levy,et al.  2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference , 2003, Intensive Care Medicine.

[2]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: III. How to Use an Article About a Diagnostic Test: B. What Are the Results and Will They Help Me In Caring for My Patients? , 1994 .

[3]  J A Swets,et al.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. , 1988, Science.

[4]  J. Vincent,et al.  Serial blood lactate levels can predict the development of multiple organ failure following septic shock. , 1996, American journal of surgery.

[5]  W. Knaus,et al.  Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. , 1992, Chest.

[6]  G. Jacobsen,et al.  Early lactate clearance is associated with improved outcome in severe sepsis and septic shock* , 2004, Critical care medicine.

[7]  Hien Nguyen,et al.  From vital signs to clinical outcomes for patients with sepsis: a machine learning basis for a clinical decision support system , 2014, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[8]  R F Woolson,et al.  The dynamics of disease progression in sepsis: Markov modeling describing the natural history and the likely impact of effective antisepsis agents. , 1998, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[9]  Robert Winkler,et al.  The First Positive: Computing Positive Predictive Value at the Extremes , 2000, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  Ji-Hyun Kim,et al.  Estimating classification error rate: Repeated cross-validation, repeated hold-out and bootstrap , 2009, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[11]  Christopher E. Hann,et al.  Integral-based parameter identification for long-term dynamic verification of a glucose-insulin system model , 2005, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[12]  R. Jaeschke,et al.  A readers' guide to the interpretation of diagnostic test properties: clinical example of sepsis , 2003, Intensive Care Medicine.