Back

State-Dependent Parameter Relevance in Intensive Care: Syndrome-Specific Centroids Improve Orbit-Based Mortality Prediction from AUC 0.59 to 0.83 in 59,362 Predictions

Basilakis, A.; Duenser, M. W.

2026-04-08 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.64898/2026.04.05.26350216 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: The Therapeutic Distance framework (Paper 1) achieved AUC 0.61 for orbit-based mortality prediction in 11,627 sepsis patients. We hypothesised that incorporating state-dependent parameter relevance would substantially improve prediction. Methods: We extended the framework to 84,176 ICU patients from MIMIC-IV v3.1 across 16 clinical syndromes. Validation included full-population leave-one-out (n=59,362), head-to-head comparison against SAPS-II and logistic regression on 34,467 matched patients with bootstrap confidence intervals, temporal validation, outcome permutation, sensitivity analysis, and calibration assessment. Results: Full-population leave-one-out achieved AUC 0.832 (n=59,362). On 34,467 matched patients, Therapeutic Distance (AUC 0.841) significantly outperformed both SAPS-II (0.786; delta=+0.055, 95% CI +0.048 to +0.061, p<0.001) and logistic regression (0.788). Temporal validation showed stable performance (delta=-0.006). Outcome permutation confirmed genuine signal (AUC 0.859 to 0.498 with shuffled mortality). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated near-zero variation (delta 0.0006-0.003). The framework performed well for 8 of 16 syndromes (AUC >0.70) and failed for DKA and post-cardiac surgery (AUC <0.40). Conclusions: Therapeutic Distance provides therapy-specific risk stratification that exceeds both established severity scores and standard machine learning while remaining robust to hyperparameter choices, temporal drift, and outcome permutation.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.