Clinical Decision-Support Systems for Intensive Care Units



Clinical Decision-Support Systems for Intensive Care Units

Using Case-Based Reasoning

Monique Frize*+, Robin Walker#^

*School of Information Technology and Engineering, University of Ottawa

+Dept. of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University

#Dept. of Paediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario

^Dept. of Paediatrics, University of Ottawa,

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Mailing address: Dr. Monique Frize

Dept. of Systems and Computer Engineering,

Minto Centre 3012, Carleton University

1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6

Abstract

The artificial intelligence approach used in this work focusses on case-based reasoning techniques for the estimation of medical outcomes and resource utilization. The systems were designed with a view to help medical and nursing personnel to assess patient status, assist in making a diagnosis, and facilitate the selection of a course of therapy. The initial prototype provided information on the closest-matching patient cases to the newest patient admission in an adult intensive care unit. The system was subsequently re-designed for use in a neonatal intensive care unit. The results of a short clinical pilot evaluation performed in both adult and neonatal units are reported and have led to substantial improvement of the prototype. Future work will include longer-term clinical trials for both adult and neonatal intensive care units, once all the software changes have been made to both prototypes in response to the comments of the users made during the preliminary evaluations. To date, the results are very encouraging and physician interest in the potential clinical usefulness of these two systems remains high, and particularly so in the new testing environment in Ottawa.

Keywords Decision-support, case-based reasoning, matching patient diagnoses, intensive care medicine (adult and neonatal), pilot clinical evaluation.

1. Introduction

Early attempts at developing decision-aid tools in medicine consisted of devising a variety of scoring systems, that is, mathematical computations involving several key variables to predict a particular medical outcome. However, many clinicians remain skeptical about using scoring models in their actual patient care [1,2]. Moreover, some versions of scoring systems like APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) [3] can be very expensive to use and may be more appropriate for determining outcomes of an entire medical unit (e.g. the impact of case mix variation [4]) rather than individual patient outcomes. Fakhry et al. studied the predictive power of APACHE II [5], an improved model, and determined that a high number of patients with a high score, i.e. those not expected to survive, 47 percent did actually survive [6]. In the neonatal intensive care setting (NICU), a number of scoring systems have also been developed. Of most significance appear to be the SNAP score [7], requiring a fairly large number of variables (28), reported to correlate well with mortality and length of stay in the NICU; and CRIB [8], which however is only validated for babies of less than 1500g birth weight. More recently the SNAP II score, now based on a much smaller number of variables (6 to 9), has been validated on a wide spectrum of neonates [9-11].

These limitations, and the fact that personal computers have acquired much power in the past few years and thus can add powerful tools at the bedside, have been the motivation behind this new work. Computer decision-support systems may also offer a broader solution to the estimation of particular medical outcomes than each of the scoring systems studied on an individual basis.

2. Background and medical context

Diagnosis, therapy, and prognostication in the clinical situation depend on physician knowledge and experience. Physicians intuitively use information from previous patient encounters. The cognitive process retrieves from memory one or more past cases believed to resemble a current case and adapts previous solutions to solve the current problem. The new case and solutions are then stored in memory for use with future cases [12]. Similarly, the case-based reasoning (CBR) approach is to adapt old problems (i.e. cases) and solutions to explaining or solving new problems or cases. An interesting system was developed at the University of New Brunswick [13] which applied CBR to the analysis of fault reports in a telecommunication network. This system combined an expert system shell with CBR capabilities using the ART-IM software (Automated Reasoning Tool for Information Management) [14], and a GUI (Graphical User Interface) to provide a user-friendly tool for fault analysis in real-life situations. This new tool, tested and used by New Brunswick Telephone, presents the ten closest-matching faults to a newly reported fault. This concept formed the basis of the development of a tool applied to intensive care medicine called AIDEAS for ICUs@ (Intelligent Decision-Aid System for Intensive Care Units), a system designed to list ten closest-matching cases to a new admitted patient case [15].

3. System design and development of the Case-based Reasoner (CBR): for adults and neonates

Data collection

An adult database of over 3000 intensive care patients (ICU), containing 98 fields of clinical and administrative information on patients admitted to the ICU since 1988, originally stored in Dbase IV, was made available to the research group in 1992 by Dr. F. Solven, an intensivist at the Dr. E. Chalmers Hospital (DECH). Data collection was primarily prospective, with some retrospective chart review. Since its inception, null entries have been recorded as distinct from zero entries to ensure data integrity. Up to seven medical diagnoses and multiple procedural information can be entered, with auxiliary space for free-form comments. Significant events and complications were also noted for each patient. This rich medical database was the foundation on which much of the early work was developed.

Subsequently, a neonatal database was provided by Dr. Robin Walker from the Childrens Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) and from the Ottawa Hospital, the General Campus (OH-GC), containing approximately 1100 patient records and 200 fields of data for each case admitted to their Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). One year ago, the Canadian NICU Network (CNN) provided a database containing 20,000 neonatal intensive care (NICU) patient cases collected in a standardized manner by seventeen neonatal intensive care units across Canada, between January 8, 1996, and October 31, 1997. These databases contain data collected at four different points in time (admission, day 3, day 14, and discharge date), which will eventually help the team to explore the impact of the time-varying aspects of the data on the performance and usefulness of the system [16].

The initial stage of development of IDEAS for ICUs (the adult version)

design and features

The first step was to select an expert system shell from a variety of products with the following features: be licensed software (available), have case-based reasoning and graphical user interface (GUI) capability, forward rule chaining, the ability to accept unkown information, the ability to embed the software in other applications, and be designed for a multi-tasking Windows environment. Seven software packages were evaluated and the choice rested with the ART-IM package from Inference Corporation [14] which uses a Visual Basic GUI, allows rule-based reasoning, and can be embedded into other software. It was felt by the research team that, even though an in-house program could have been developed to meet the needs of the research project, such development would have considerably delayed the creation of the new tool desired for matching similar patient cases in the ICU.

The original adult ICU data was transferred from DBase IV format to the case-based reasoner prototype. DBase IV is limited to finding exact matches through Structured Query Language (SQL), which is not as useful, for our application, as a tool providing ‘near’ matches available with a CBR engine. A useful description and review of the general structure of a case-based reasoner can be found at the web site: .

By developing the patient database into a patient case-base, the user is able to match in a more dynamic fashion and expand the system using the expert shell’s rule-base capabilities. The research group’s earliest CBR prototype was built with ART-IM [14] which employs a modified Rete-match algorithm within its inference engine. At the heart of an expert or knowledge-based system is the inference engine which is the mechanism by which the system derives its inference and control to determine an outcome or solution. The engine represents the facts and rules which control the general system as well as the search strategies used in the development of a solution. The original Rete was developed by Charles Forgy [17]. This algorithm allows rapid several patterns/several objects matching to be made. A set of scores are generated which correspond to the similarity of the new presented case and those already stored in the case-base. These scores can be ordered and displayed along with pertinent information from their corresponding cases. The methodology used in IDEAS for ICU’s inference engine is a modified form of the Rete match algorithm. The ART-IM CBR offers the ability to match textual as well as numeric information. The textual information can match on exact or partial matches of strings of information, or on words, or on characters. It can also match on numeric features or partially match on close numeric values determined by a user defined range. This partial matching ability allows the CBR to derive a list of ‘similar’ cases and to rank them according to similarity.

The Rete match algorithm is faster than conventional matching algorithms. Number matching allows for the match weight to be scaled proportionately, based on a triangular function of the particular patient field. Each method of matching, and the match weights associated with them, were first selected in direct consultation with the physician on the team to arrive at the pre-set default values. In addition to this default mode, the system allows the physician to ‘fine tune’ any of the matching field weights to a patient’s specific characteristics. This flexibility was felt to be important, since the same procedures performed on individual patients may have varying degrees of significance. Each retrieved case displays information such as demographics, diagnoses, complications, comments and notes added to the file, by selecting the appropriate windows from the patient case. This allows physicians to review all relevant data from previous cases and to make decisions on the new case. In the medical context then, the physician potentially has information on many similar cases whose management and complications may be relevant to the current case. Since the human memory of past cases is limited to probably a few cases, the system allows instant recall of any case from thousands to be retrieved. When a patient is discharged from the ICU, the patient history is automatically added to the patient case-base, allowing the accuracy and quality of the data to improve with time [18-20]. Figure 1 shows the principle of the system design.

The earlier prototype was limited by the fact that it had a textual interface implemented directly on the expert system shell’s design platform. The next version of the prototype (IDEAS for ICUs) included a graphical user-interface (GUI) in Visual Basic Version 3.1. The knowledge-based system contains both case-based reasoning and rule-based reasoning capabilities. It is the blending of the rule-based ability, with the knowledge of the medical experts on the team, that provided the foundation and the development of this decision- aid system. IDEAS for ICUs issues warnings, depending on the outcome of the matched cases. For example, a strong warning will be issued if a match is made on a patient who died in the ICU and has a high match score with the new patient [18-20].

The first pilot clinical evaluation in an adult intensive care unit (at the Dr. E. Chalmers Hospital in Fredericton) was done over a three-week period beginning on August 11, 1994. The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committees at both institutions (hospital and university). For each new patient admitted in the unit over that period, a “summaries window” of ten closest matching patients was presented to the physicians, with a questionnaire on the reverse side for them to fill for each patient entry. The selected match-weights were not changed for fine-tuning during this trial. The questionnaires and summaries, placed in each patient chart, were filled in by physicians during or just after patient discharge. Twenty-seven patients were included in the study; four were not yet discharged and therefore excluded from the results. In this very early study, none of the physicians felt that the system could be harmful, 5 evaluation forms said that the system would be of benefit to clinicians, and 22 indicated no benefit could be seen at this time. Many of the comments added to the form mentioned that even though benefits could not be seen in this early prototype, the users could see potential benefit in the future. Comments were very constructive on how the system could be improved from the users’ point of view and these suggestions led to a new version of the system (version 2.2). A useful suggestion was that the weighting mechanism for partial matching needed to be improved so that the physicians could more easily visualise their significance. Another comment was to break down the diagnosis field into primary, secondary, and tertiary diagnoses. Of particular significance would be an explanation of the resulting matches. This would be critical for physician acceptance in future trials.

The next version

A new approach was to establish matching weights based on statistical analysis of the data in the database instead of using physician-selected weights. Before quantifying the weights statistically, the research team felt that it would be useful to apply Civetta et al.’s [21] model of adult ICU patient management, which is a model of clinical decision-making influenced by the time spent by patients in the ICU. These authors suggest that the basis of fundamental clinical decisions were contained in the elements of the clinical care process and in the components of predictive indices and they viewed the process as six separate phases, during the passage of time of the patient’s stay, to assess therapeutic choices and results. The six phases suggested by Civetta et al. [21] were: Source of admission, ICU admission, the first 24 hours (short-term), a stay of 2-14 days (continued care), more than 14 days (long term), and discharge.

At DECH, ICU patients are divided into two main groups: post operative (POSTOP) and non-post-operative (NONPOSTOP). Our graduate student, Lijuan Wang [22], first divided the complete case-base into these two basic groups, and then built three case-bases for various lengths of stay in the ICU, according to Civetta et al.’s time model: 24 hrs or less, 2-14 days, and more than 14 days. This approach yielded six case-bases in total: three for POSTOP patients and three for NONPOSTOP patients. [Note that three other phases suggested by Civetta et al. have not been used to divide the patient base; instead, these parameters have been incorporated within the database for each patient (source of admission, admission to the ICU, and discharge information)]. For each phase and patient group, it was felt that an examination of the predictive indices and scoring systems, to extract the important elements, could be helpful in the process of clinical decision-making. Attention was placed on the physiologic processes that were deemed to have the greatest effect on survival, rather than on mortality [21-23]. For the first phase (0-24 hrs), patients fall into three categories: short-term survivors, early death, or critical patients. Some of the variables helpful in separating a short-term survivor from early death are: APACHE, TISS (Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System), and CRV (Cardio-Respiratory Variables). In the next phase (2-14 days), the emphasis is on continued care. Useful parameters are: number of hours ventilated, days in the ICU, and duration of arterial line. For the last phase (more than 14 days), to separate survivors from others, protein metabolism (urea and lactate in particular) and the immune function were deemed useful.

The weight of each field heavily affects the matching results for a query of the ten closest matching cases. A thorough statistical analysis was done with 3245 patient records, leading to a methodology for the selection of the weights for each of the 25 basic fields used for case-based matching. First, a study of the relationship between variables was done using Spearman correlation, chi-square, and ANOVA analyses. The weight of the ‘leading’ parameters, determined by results of the statistical analyses, was set at the maximum value. Other weights were set at a value equivalent to the Spearman correlation (found by testing the correlation of this variable with one or more of the leading parameters). In cases where more than one leading parameter existed, the highest overall correlation value was used [22-23]. A comparison was made of the physician-selected weights with weights defined by statistical analysis and reported in the results section below.

Speed considerations and a new graphical-user interface

Another new feature of IDEAS for ICUs (version 3.0) is the use of a faster reasoning shell, ‘The Easy Reasoner’[24], replacing the ART-IM reasoner [14]. The speed of matching with the new engine increased four-fold when using all the variables, and up to ten-fold when using a limited number of key variables (six). The running speed includes the time to build a new case-based index, loading the index, and finding the ten closest-matching cases. The new version, a user-friendly clinical knowledge management tool, has been updated to using Microsoft’s Visual Basic 4.0 graphical-user interface (GUI), replacing version 3.0 of that GUI. It allows for a natural integration of the patient database and the patient case-base, such as combined storage and retrieval of information. The GUI presents a choice of several windows to enter the various types of information (e.g. administration and demographics, diagnosis, complications, summary output, etc). The ‘Summary Statistics’ window features several new descriptive statistics, comparing the new patient case to the ten matched cases [22-23]. Figure 2 shows a typical output of ten closely-matched cases.

The neonatal version (IDEAS for NICUs)

The software prototype tool, IDEAS for ICUs, was re-designed for use with neonatal intensive care patients and renamed IDEAS for NICUs. This process was much more difficult than previously anticipated, as the neonatal data contained time-varying points and had few variables in common with the previous design for adults. The faster search engine also had to be integrated into the new model and completely new match-weights had to be created by the neonatal physicians for the first prototype applied to this environment.

4. Testing and results

The physician involved with the clinical study at DECH has now left and the prototype is in the process of being re-designed for an adult ICU unit in Ottawa (OH-GC) under the guidance of Dr. Paul Hebert, an intensivist and epidemiologist. In the meantime, an interesting comparison was made of the weights as selected by the physicians and those obtained from the statistical analysis. Table 1 shows the match-weights for each of the three phases and for each group of patients (POSTOP and NONPOSTOP) and the last column shows the physician-selected weights for a selected number of variables. A small number of variables, namely ‘sex’, ‘having had an epidural during surgery’ or ‘a naso-gastric tube’, had the same weight in all cases. Most other variables however show not only variations between the physician-based weights and the statistically determined ones, but also between POSTOP and NONPOSTOP patient groups, and between the various phases of stay in the ICU.

It is not possible to predict yet if physician-selected weights or the statistically-determined weights will be the better approach. This has to be tested in a new random study. Physician selected weights are based on many years of experience and this may be as valid as the statistical approach. A future clinical trial should allow to clarify this point in the future.

The original CBR was a very new concept and a useful basis on which to develop the newer versions. Because the new CBR provides matches in a fraction of the time needed by the older version (seconds instead of minutes), it will now be possible to use the tool in a longer clinical assessment study than was possible with the earlier version. The earlier pilot study, however, enabled the incorporation of many excellent suggestions from the practitioners in the new version.

The neonatal version was tested by a graduate student, Hongmei Liu at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) in Ottawa with five neonatalogists [25]. This phase was especially assessing the user-friendliness of the tool and thus concentrated on the GUI. The comments gathered during this study on all aspects of data and output presentations were very rich in suggestions and the prototype was modified substantially in the Visual Basic part of the system by a student last summer [26]. In general, the neonatalogists liked the screen layout of the CBR, the sequence of the screens, the easy movement from one screen to another, the terminology used, and rated well the user-friendliness of the system; as to clinical usefulness, that is, on whether the system would alter the patient management course or help to estimate mortality in terms of short-term survival were rated fairly low at this stage. Higher ratings were received for the system leading the user to consider other diagnostic possibilities. Many specific comments were made on the presentation of the information which were incorporated into the new version of the NICU prototype [25]. Prior to the longer-term clinical trial of the IDEAS for NICUs, a programmer will be needed to eliminate the few remaining concerns and user problems and present a version that will operate smoothly in the NICU. This is vital in order to have the entire cooperation of the medical and nursing team for this future study.

Conclusion

A retrospective look at the accomplished work to date re-affirms the choice of approaches used so far and suggests expanding them to take into account information from parametric and non-parametric statistical methods applied for knowledge discovery in databases. IDEAS for ICUs which had used physician-selected matching weights in its first two versions has now been updated in version 3.0 to use quantitatively determined weights. Moreover, instead of using one weight for each variable, this weight can have different values depending on the length of stay of the patient in the ICU following the model of the various phases patients go through in this type of care. The team also succeeded in integrating a much faster matching engine into the new version, which is an exceedingly important consideration when designing medical decision-support tools.

Future work

New experiments will include testing how the size of the database affects the speed of matching and the output (10 closest matching cases). Other experiments will test whether the output of a number of matching cases changes when using admission data only, or day 3 data, or day 14 data, or discharge data in the neonatal database. These experiments will help to assess the impact of time-varying data on the outputs.

These steps will lead to a full clinical investigation to study the impact of our decision-aid systems on how physicians make a diagnosis and decide on their patient management plan. This qualitative study will be done with the help of questionnaires and other epidemiological studies suggested by an epidemiologist/intensivist, Dr. Paul Hebert at OH-GC. The questionnaire for physicians and nurses will be applied to the NICU at the CHEO and OH-GC. The system is designed to be user-friendly and the outputs mimic the process physicians use in decision-making so that their use is intuitive. Typical questions developed in the preliminary version of the questionnaire include: Is the system helpful as an instant ‘memory’ of past similar cases? Does the information change the diagnosis that would have been made without the tool? Does the information help the physician to explain the prognosis to the family? to other personnel involved in patient care in the unit? Does the information help in the choice of treatment and management of the patient? Would the physician/nurse continue to use the system in clinical practice? This assessment of the subjective impressions of health care personnel using the systems is essential before claims can be made on the system’s clinical relevance and usefulness.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a Medical Research Council grant. The authors would like to thank Lijuan Wang for her help on the adult database, and Hongmei Liu and Elise Legault for their work on the neonatal version of the system. Also, many thanks to Dr. B. Nickerson (University of New Brunswick) and Dr. F.G. Solven (Dr. E. Chalmers Hospital) for their co-supervision of Ms Wang’s thesis, and the neonatalogists (Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario) for their review of Ms Liu’s thesis at Carleton University.

References

1. Hyzg RC. ICU Scoring and Clinical Decision Making. [Editorial] Chest 1995; 107(2):1482-1483.

2. LeGall J et al., Customized Probability Models For Early Severe Sepsis in Adult Intensive Care Patients. JAMA 1995; 273(8):644-650.

3. Knaus WA, Zimmerman JE, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Lawrence DE. APACHE-Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation: a Physiologically Based Classification System. Crit Care Med 1981; 9:591-597.

4. Rowan K, et al. Intensive Care Society’s APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland – I: Variations in case mix of adult admissions to general intensive care units and impact on outcome. BMJ 1993; 307:972-977.

5. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. An Evaluation of Outcome from Intensive Care in Major Medical Centres. Annuals of Internal Medicine 1986; 104:410-418.

6. Fahkry SM, Rutledge R, Rutherford E, Albrecht R, O’Meeghan R, Udekwu O. Unexpected ICU Survival in Patients with High APACHE II Scores: a Multi-Institutional Study of 8,408 Surgical Patients from 5 Hospitals. Crit. Care Med 1994; 22(1):A44.

7. Richardson DK, Gray JE, McCormick MC, Workman-Daniels K, Goldmann D. Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology (SNAP): Validation of a New Physiology-based Severity of Illness Index. Pediatrics 1993; 91:617-623.

8. The International Neonatal Network. The CRIB (clinical risk index for babies) score: A tool for assessing initial neonatal risk and comparing performance of neonatal intensive care units. Lancet 1993; 342:193-198.

9. Richardson DK, Escobar GJ. Simplified and revalidated Score for Neonatal Acute Physiology (SNAP-II) maintains excellent predictive performance. Pediatr Res 1998; 43:227A.

10. Chien LY, Lee SK, Thiessen P, Whyte R. Canadian NICU Network. Validation of the SNAP and SNAP-II on morbidity of infants less than 33 weeks gestational age. Pediatr Res 1999; 45:240A.

11. Lee SK, Ohlsson A, Synnes A, Peliowski A, Koravangatu S, Chien LY, Canadian NICU Network. Mortality variations and illness severity (SNAP-II) in Canadian NICUs. Pediatr Res 1999; 45:248A.

12. Data analysis using artificial neural networks and computer-aided decision-making in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Walker CR, Frize M, Tong Y. Pediatr Res 1999; 45:231A. Abstract.

13. Cookson RL, Nickerson BG. Fault Diagnosis Using Case-Based reasoning, 5th University of New Brunswick AI Symposium 1993; Fredericton:171-181.

14. Inference Corporation, Case-Based Reasoning in ART-IM. Version 2.5, Inference Corporation, 550 N Continental Blvd., el Segundo, California 1991.

15. Taylor KB, Nickerson BG, Frize M, Solven FG, Dunfield V. Use of Case-Based Reasoning to Assist Patient Management in an Intensive Care Unit. Proc of the Joint Conference of COMP and the CMBES 1993; Ottawa:248-249.

16.. Forgy CL. “Rete: A fast algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Match Problem. Artificial Intelligence 1982; 19:17-37.

17. Lee SK, McMillan D, Ohlsson A, Pendray M, Synnes A, Whyte R, Chien L-Y, Sale J, Canadian NICU Network. Variations in practice and outcomes in the Canadian NICU Network: 1996-1997. (Pediatrics: In press.)

18. Frize M, Solven FG, Stevenson M, Nickerson BG, Buskard T, Taylor K. Computer-Assisted Decision-support Systems for Patient Management in an Intensive Care Unit. Proc. Medinfo >95 1995; Vancouver:1009-1012.

19. Frize M, Taylor KB, Nickerson BG, Solven FG, Borkar H, Dunfield V. A Knowledge-Based System to Assist Patient Management in an Intensive Care Unit. IMIA-IFMBE Working Conf 1993; Allborg:156-159.

20. Frize M, Taylor KB, Nickerson BG, Solven FG, Borkar H. A Knowledge-based System for the Intensive Care Unit. Proc of the 15th Ann. Int. Conf. of the IEEE-EMBS 1993; San Diego:677-678.

21. Civetta JM, Hudson-Civetta JA, Nelson LD. Evaluation of APACHE II for Cost Containment and Quality Assurance. Annals Surg 1990; 212(3):266-276.

22. Wang L. Constructing Case Bases from Medical Databases. MSc(CS) Thesis, University of New Brunswick 1997.

23. Frize M, Wang L, Ennett C, Nickerson BG, Solven FG, Stevenson M. New Advances and Validation of Knowledge Management Tools for Critical Care Using Classifier Techniques. Proc. AMIA Annual Symposium 1998:553-558.

24. The Haley Enterprise. Sewickley, P.A.

25. Liu H. Pilot Studies of Physician-Computer Interaction Using the IDEAS Software for Neonatal ICUs. Master’s in I.S.S. Thesis, Carleton University. 1998

26. Legault E. Coop Term Report: Methodology in Programming. Summer Term Placement, University of Ottawa 1999.

Short Biographies

Monique Frize, P. Eng., O.C.

Monique Frize completed her BASc in Electrical Engineering at the University of Ottawa in 1966, an M. Phil. at Imperial College of Science and Technology in London (UK) in 1970, an MBA at Université de Moncton in 1986, and a doctorate at Erasmus Universiteit in Rotterdam (The Netherlands) in 1989. Dr. Frize has published over 90 papers in refereed journals and conference proceedings in the field of biomedical engineering and medical informatics. Monique Frize has received three honourary degrees since 1992, was inducted as a Fellow of the Canadian Academy of Engineering in 1992 and as an officer of the Order of Canada in 1993.

Robin Walker

Robin Walker completed his M.B. in Medicine at the University of Manchester (UK) in 1971 and his postgraduate training in paediatrics and neonatal-perinatal medicine at Dalhousie University (Halifax, NS) with F.R.C.P. (C) certification in Paediatrics in 1977. Dr. Walker has published 20 papers in refereed journals, 35 abstracts in refereed conference proceedings, and 3 book chapters. He is a former President of the Canadian Council on Children and Youth and Past-President of the Neonatal-Perinatal Section of the Canadian Paediatric Society.

Table 1 - Weights assigned for a few selected variables

| | | | | | | | |

|Variable |Phase 1 |Phase 2 |Phase 3 |Phase 1 |Phase 2 |Phase 3 |Physician-based |

| |POSTOP |POSTOP |POSTOP |NONPOSTOP |NONPOSTOP |NONPOSTOP | |

| | | | | | | | |

|Age |100 |11 |100 |45 |19 |100 |100 |

| | | | | | | | |

|APACHE |100 |57 |57 |100 |52 |52 |80 |

| | | | | | | | |

|Admitting |N/A |N/A |N/A |100 |80 |60 |100 |

| | | | | | | | |

|Days-in-ICU |53 |100 |100 |52 |100 |100 |85 |

| | | | | | | | |

|Vent-days |57 |100 |100 |48 |100 |100 |80 |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download