Paper Reading AI Learner

Pain Intensity Assessment in Sickle Cell Disease patients using Vital Signs during Hospital Visits

2020-11-24 15:25:29
Swati Padhee (1), Amanuel Alambo (1), Tanvi Banerjee (1), Arvind Subramaniam (2), Daniel M. Abrams (3), Gary K.Nave Jr. (3), Nirmish Shah (2) ((1) Wright State University, (2) Duke University, (3) Northwestern University)

Abstract

Pain in sickle cell disease (SCD) is often associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and high healthcare costs. The standard method for predicting the absence, presence, and intensity of pain has long been self-report. However, medical providers struggle to manage patients based on subjective pain reports correctly and pain medications often lead to further difficulties in patient communication as they may cause sedation and sleepiness. Recent studies have shown that objective physiological measures can predict subjective self-reported pain scores for inpatient visits using machine learning (ML) techniques. In this study, we evaluate the generalizability of ML techniques to data collected from 50 patients over an extended period across three types of hospital visits (i.e., inpatient, outpatient and outpatient evaluation). We compare five classification algorithms for various pain intensity levels at both intra-individual (within each patient) and inter-individual (between patients) level. While all the tested classifiers perform much better than chance, a Decision Tree (DT) model performs best at predicting pain on an 11-point severity scale (from 0-10) with an accuracy of 0.728 at an inter-individual level and 0.653 at an intra-individual level. The accuracy of DT significantly improves to 0.941 on a 2-point rating scale (i.e., no/mild pain: 0-5, severe pain: 6-10) at an intra-individual level. Our experimental results demonstrate that ML techniques can provide an objective and quantitative evaluation of pain intensity levels for all three types of hospital visits.

Abstract (translated)

URL

https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.01126

PDF

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2012.01126.pdf


Tags
3D Action Action_Localization Action_Recognition Activity Adversarial Agent Attention Autonomous Bert Boundary_Detection Caption Chat Classification CNN Compressive_Sensing Contour Contrastive_Learning Deep_Learning Denoising Detection Dialog Diffusion Drone Dynamic_Memory_Network Edge_Detection Embedding Embodied Emotion Enhancement Face Face_Detection Face_Recognition Facial_Landmark Few-Shot Gait_Recognition GAN Gaze_Estimation Gesture Gradient_Descent Handwriting Human_Parsing Image_Caption Image_Classification Image_Compression Image_Enhancement Image_Generation Image_Matting Image_Retrieval Inference Inpainting Intelligent_Chip Knowledge Knowledge_Graph Language_Model Matching Medical Memory_Networks Multi_Modal Multi_Task NAS NMT Object_Detection Object_Tracking OCR Ontology Optical_Character Optical_Flow Optimization Person_Re-identification Point_Cloud Portrait_Generation Pose Pose_Estimation Prediction QA Quantitative Quantitative_Finance Quantization Re-identification Recognition Recommendation Reconstruction Regularization Reinforcement_Learning Relation Relation_Extraction Represenation Represenation_Learning Restoration Review RNN Salient Scene_Classification Scene_Generation Scene_Parsing Scene_Text Segmentation Self-Supervised Semantic_Instance_Segmentation Semantic_Segmentation Semi_Global Semi_Supervised Sence_graph Sentiment Sentiment_Classification Sketch SLAM Sparse Speech Speech_Recognition Style_Transfer Summarization Super_Resolution Surveillance Survey Text_Classification Text_Generation Tracking Transfer_Learning Transformer Unsupervised Video_Caption Video_Classification Video_Indexing Video_Prediction Video_Retrieval Visual_Relation VQA Weakly_Supervised Zero-Shot