Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2025

Assessment and Evaluation of the High Risk Neonate: The NICU Network Neurobehavioral Scale
Published on: August 25, 2014
Natural language processing diagnosed behavioural disturbance phenotypes in the intensive care unit: characteristics,
Marcus Young1,2, Natasha E Holmes1,3, Kartik Kishore1
1Data Analytics Research and Evaluation (DARE) Centre, Austin Health and The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia.
Background:
Natural language processing (NLP) may help evaluate the characteristics, prevalence, trajectory, treatment, and outcomes of behavioural disturbance phenotypes in critically ill patients.
Methods:
We obtained electronic clinical notes, demographic information, outcomes, and treatment data from three medical-surgical ICUs. Using NLP, we screened for behavioural disturbance phenotypes based on words suggestive of an agitated state, a non-agitated state, or a combination of both.
Results:
We studied 2931 patients. Of these, 225 (7.7%) were NLP-Dx-BD positive for the agitated phenotype, 544 (18.6%) for the non-agitated phenotype and 667 (22.7%) for the combined phenotype. Patients with these phenotypes carried multiple clinical baseline differences. On time-dependent multivariable analysis to compensate for immortal time bias and after adjustment for key outcome predictors, agitated phenotype patients were more likely to receive antipsychotic medications (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 1.35-2.51, p < 0.001) compared to non-agitated phenotype patients but not compared to combined phenotype patients (OR 1.27, 0.86-1.89, p = 0.229). Moreover, agitated phenotype patients were more likely to die than other phenotypes patients (OR 1.57, 1.10-2.25, p = 0.012 vs non-agitated phenotype; OR 4.61, 2.14-9.90, p < 0.001 vs. combined phenotype). This association was strongest in patients receiving mechanical ventilation when compared with the combined phenotype (OR 7.03, 2.07-23.79, p = 0.002). A similar increased risk was also seen for patients with the non-agitated phenotype compared with the combined phenotype (OR 6.10, 1.80-20.64, p = 0.004).
Conclusions:
NLP-Dx-BD screening enabled identification of three behavioural disturbance phenotypes with different characteristics, prevalence, trajectory, treatment, and outcome. Such phenotype identification appears relevant to prognostication and trial design.
More Related Videos
12:18Behavioral Phenotyping of Murine Disease Models with the Integrated Behavioral Station INBEST
Published on: April 23, 2015
11:14A Novel Experimental and Analytical Approach to the Multimodal Neural Decoding of Intent During Social Interaction in Freely-behaving Human Infants
Published on: October 4, 2015
Related Concept Videos
Operant Conditioning Intervention
In operant conditioning, behaviors that are...
Nursing Interventions II: Selecting and Classifying the Nursing Interventions
Personality Disorders: Paranoid and Schizoid
Paranoid Personality Disorder
Paranoid personality disorder is...
Conduct Disorder
Classification of Illness
An illness is a response to a disease in which the person's level of functioning is changed compared with a previous level. The general classification of illness includes acute and chronic.
Acute illness is severe...
Introduction to Psychological Disorders
Deviant Behavior
Deviance in behavior refers to actions or thought patterns that significantly diverge from societal norms or...