Evaluates machine learning models on four critical care prediction tasks using the multi-centre eICU-CRD dataset: in-hospital mortality, remaining length of stay, patient phenotyping, and physiologic decompensation. It probes the models' ability to handle longitudinal clinical data, compare categorical vs numerical feature representations, and generalize across multi-centre settings. Use when the user wants to benchmark on eICU-CRD, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports AUROC.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill eicu-crd-clinical-bench-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Eicu Crd Clinical Bench Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-eicu-crd-clinical-bench-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: eicu-crd-clinical-bench-eval
description: Evaluates machine learning models on four critical care prediction tasks using the multi-centre eICU-CRD dataset: in-hospital mortality, remaining length of stay, patient phenotyping, and physiologic decompensation. It probes the models' ability to handle longitudinal clinical data, compare categorical vs numerical feature representations, and generalize across multi-centre settings. Use when the user wants to benchmark on eICU-CRD, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports AUROC.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 1910.00964
bibtex_key: sheikhalishahi2019benchmarking
confidence: high
---
# eicu-crd-clinical-bench-eval
> Benchmarking machine learning models on multi-centre eICU critical care dataset — Sheikhalishahi et al. (2019) (arXiv:1910.00964, 2019)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates machine learning models on four critical care prediction tasks using the multi-centre eICU-CRD dataset: in-hospital mortality, remaining length of stay, patient phenotyping, and physiologic decompensation. It probes the models' ability to handle longitudinal clinical data, compare categorical vs numerical feature representations, and generalize across multi-centre settings.
## Datasets
- **eICU-CRD** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1); repo https://github.com/mostafaalishahi/eICU_Benchmark_updated
## Metrics
- `AUROC` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics curve. Measures the model's ability to discriminate between positive and negative classes across all classification thresholds.
- `AUPRC` — range: [0, 1]
- Area Under the Precision-Recall Curve. Summarizes the trade-off between precision and recall, particularly useful for imbalanced datasets.
- `R^2` — range: other
- Coefficient of determination. Represents the proportion of variance in the dependent variable that is predictable from the independent variables.
- `MAE` — range: other
- Mean Absolute Error. The average of the absolute differences between predicted and actual values.
## Input / output format
**Input**: 12-hour derivation window of longitudinal ICU data containing numerical and categorical clinical variables, processed in a 6-hour sliding window.
**Output**: Binary classification (mortality/decompensation), continuous regression (remaining length of stay), or multi-class/multi-label predictions (phenotyping).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def score(y_true, y_pred, task):
if task == 'classification':
auc = roc_auc_score(y_true, y_pred)
prc = average_precision_score(y_true, y_pred)
y_bin = (y_pred >= 0.5).astype(int)
ppv = precision_score(y_true, y_bin)
npv = recall_score(y_true, y_bin, pos_label=0)
return {'AUROC': auc, 'AUPRC': prc, 'PPV': ppv, 'NPV': npv}
elif task == 'regression':
r2 = r2_score(y_true, y_pred)
mae = mean_absolute_error(y_true, y_pred)
return {'R2': r2, 'MAE': mae}
```
## Common pitfalls
- Sensitivity and Specificity are evaluated at a fixed 90% threshold for direct comparison, not as AUC values.
- The evaluation uses a 12-hour derivation window with a 6-hour sliding step, which may differ from standard fixed train/val/test splits.
- Categorical variables are compared using Entity Embeddings (EE) vs One-Hot Encoding (OHE), significantly impacting performance and requiring careful control.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We evaluate our model through a 5-fold cross-validation using the following evaluation metrics: for the regression task we report coefficient of determination $R^{2}$, and Mean Absolute Error (MAE), while for the classification tasks we report AUROC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics), AUPRC (Area Under the Precision Recall Curve), Specificity and Sensitivity (set to 90% to facilitate direct comparison of results), Positive Predictive Value (PPV) and Negative Predictive Value (NPV); all the numerical results are presented with 95% confidence interval (CI).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{sheikhalishahi2019benchmarking,
title={Benchmarking machine learning models on multi-centre eICU critical care dataset},
author={Sheikhalishahi et al. (2019)},
year={2019},
note={arXiv:1910.00964}
}
```
- arXiv: 1910.00964
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!