7 research outputs found
Software reuse in a paralysis dataset based on categorical clustering and the Pearson distribution
AbstractSoftware reuse is the process of building software applications that make use of formerly developed software components. In this paper, we explain the benefits that can be obtained from using statistical procedures for prescribing medicines, especially in rural areas, which have limited resources available on hand. It should be noted that although the expert systems were successful in research, they never dominated the market when actual patient treatment was considered. The proposed methodology is compared with the categorical clustering technique. The Fenton and Melton Coupling Metric is considered for the evaluation of the statistic model. The reliability of this methodology is also considered
Software Reuse in Cardiology Related Medical Database Using K-Means Clustering Technique
Software technology based on reuse is identified as a process of designing
software for the reuse purpose. The software reuse is a process in which the
existing software is used to build new software. A metric is a quantitative
indicator of an attribute of an item or thing. Reusability is the likelihood
for a segment of source code that can be used again to add new functionalities
with slight or no modification. A lot of research has been projected using
reusability in reducing code, domain, requirements, design etc., but very
little work is reported using software reuse in medical domain. An attempt is
made to bridge the gap in this direction, using the concepts of clustering and
classifying the data based on the distance measures. In this paper cardiologic
database is considered for study. The developed model will be useful for
Doctors or Paramedics to find out the patients level in the cardiologic
disease, deduce the medicines required in seconds and propose them to the
patient. In order to measure the reusability K means clustering algorithm is
used.Comment: 5 pages. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1212.031
A Bayesian reanalysis of the Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial
Background
Timing of initiation of kidney-replacement therapy (KRT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial compared two strategies of KRT initiation (accelerated versus standard) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and found neutral results for 90-day all-cause mortality. Probabilistic exploration of the trial endpoints may enable greater understanding of the trial findings. We aimed to perform a reanalysis using a Bayesian framework.
Methods
We performed a secondary analysis of all 2927 patients randomized in multi-national STARRT-AKI trial, performed at 168 centers in 15 countries. The primary endpoint, 90-day all-cause mortality, was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. A spectrum of priors includes optimistic, neutral, and pessimistic priors, along with priors informed from earlier clinical trials. Secondary endpoints (KRT-free days and hospital-free days) were assessed using zeroâone inflated beta regression.
Results
The posterior probability of benefit comparing an accelerated versus a standard KRT initiation strategy for the primary endpoint suggested no important difference, regardless of the prior used (absolute difference of 0.13% [95% credible interval [CrI]âââ3.30%; 3.40%],âââ0.39% [95% CrIâââ3.46%; 3.00%], and 0.64% [95% CrIâââ2.53%; 3.88%] for neutral, optimistic, and pessimistic priors, respectively). There was a very low probability that the effect size was equal or larger than a consensus-defined minimal clinically important difference. Patients allocated to the accelerated strategy had a lower number of KRT-free days (median absolute difference ofâââ3.55 days [95% CrIâââ6.38;âââ0.48]), with a probability that the accelerated strategy was associated with more KRT-free days of 0.008. Hospital-free days were similar between strategies, with the accelerated strategy having a median absolute difference of 0.48 more hospital-free days (95% CrIâââ1.87; 2.72) compared with the standard strategy and the probability that the accelerated strategy had more hospital-free days was 0.66.
Conclusions
In a Bayesian reanalysis of the STARRT-AKI trial, we found very low probability that an accelerated strategy has clinically important benefits compared with the standard strategy. Patients receiving the accelerated strategy probably have fewer days alive and KRT-free. These findings do not support the adoption of an accelerated strategy of KRT initiation
Regional Practice Variation and Outcomes in the Standard Versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) Trial: A Post Hoc Secondary Analysis.
ObjectivesAmong patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) admitted to the ICU in high-income countries, regional practice variations for fluid balance (FB) management, timing, and choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality may be significant.DesignSecondary post hoc analysis of the STandard vs. Accelerated initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02568722).SettingOne hundred-fifty-three ICUs in 13 countries.PatientsAltogether 2693 critically ill patients with AKI, of whom 994 were North American, 1143 European, and 556 from Australia and New Zealand (ANZ).InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsTotal mean FB to a maximum of 14 days was +7199âmL in North America, +5641âmL in Europe, and +2211âmL in ANZ (p p p p p p p p = 0.007).ConclusionsAmong STARRT-AKI trial centers, significant regional practice variation exists regarding FB, timing of initiation of RRT, and initial use of continuous RRT. After adjustment, such practice variation was associated with lower ICU and hospital stay and 90-day mortality among ANZ patients compared with other regions