Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30543022›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2019

Applying Machine Learning Algorithms to Segment High-Cost Patient Populations.

Jiali Yan, Kristin A Linn, Brian W Powers, Jingsan Zhu, Sachin H Jain, Jennifer L Kowalski, Amol S Navathe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Unsupervised algorithms to identify potential under-coding of secondary diagnoses in hospitalisations databases in Portugal.Health information management : journal of the Health Information Management Association of Australia · 2024
    Article
  2. Subgroups of High-Cost Patients and Their Preventable Inpatient Cost in Rural China.International journal of health policy and management · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Unsupervised machine learning and prognostic factors of survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  13. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jiali YanDepartment of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Kristin A LinnDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Brian W PowersDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Jingsan ZhuDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 1108 Blockley Hall, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Sachin H JainCareMore Health System, Cerritos, CA, USA.
Jennifer L KowalskiAnthem Public Policy Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Amol S NavatheDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 1108 Blockley Hall, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. amol@wharton.upenn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEfforts to improve the value of care for high-cost patients may benefit from care management strategies targeted at clinically distinct subgroups of patients.

objectiveTo evaluate the performance of three different machine learning algorithms for identifying subgroups of high-cost patients.

designWe applied three different clustering algorithms-connectivity-based clustering using agglomerative hierarchical clustering, centroid-based clustering with the k-medoids algorithm, and density-based clustering with the OPTICS algorithm-to a clinical and administrative dataset. We then examined the extent to which each algorithm identified subgroups of patients that were (1) clinically distinct and (2) associated with meaningful differences in relevant utilization metrics.

participantsPatients enrolled in a national Medicare Advantage plan, categorized in the top decile of spending (n = 6154). MAIN MEASURES: Post hoc discriminative models comparing the importance of variables for distinguishing observations in one cluster from the rest. Variance in utilization and spending measures. KEY

resultsConnectivity-based, centroid-based, and density-based clustering identified eight, five, and ten subgroups of high-cost patients, respectively. Post hoc discriminative models indicated that density-based clustering subgroups were the most clinically distinct. The variance of utilization and spending measures was the greatest among the subgroups identified through density-based clustering.

conclusionsMachine learning algorithms can be used to segment a high-cost patient population into subgroups of patients that are clinically distinct and associated with meaningful differences in utilization and spending measures. For these purposes, density-based clustering with the OPTICS algorithm outperformed connectivity-based and centroid-based clustering algorithms.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsHealth Care CostsAgedAged, 80 and overCluster AnalysisFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMedicare Part CUnited Stateshigh-cost patientsmachine learningpatient segmentation

Identifiers

PMID30543022
PMCPMC6374273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.