Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30819172›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019

Predicting life expectancy with a long short-term memory recurrent neural network using electronic medical records.

Merijn Beeksma, Suzan Verberne, Antal van den Bosch, Enny Das, Iris Hendrickx, Stef Groenewoud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The added value of text from Dutch general practitioner notes in predictive modeling.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Current Trends in Readmission Prediction: An Overview of Approaches.Arabian journal for science and engineering · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

6 authors.

Merijn BeeksmaCentre for Language Studies, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. m.t.beeksma@let.ru.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-1587-1100
Suzan VerberneLeiden Institute for Advanced Computer Sciences, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333, CA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Antal van den BoschKNAW Meertens Institute, Oudezijds Achterburgwal 185, 1012, DK, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Enny DasCentre for Language Studies, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Iris HendrickxCentre for Language Studies, Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525, HT, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Stef GroenewoudIQ Healthcare, Radboudumc, Mailbox 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLife expectancy is one of the most important factors in end-of-life decision making. Good prognostication for example helps to determine the course of treatment and helps to anticipate the procurement of health care services and facilities, or more broadly: facilitates Advance Care Planning. Advance Care Planning improves the quality of the final phase of life by stimulating doctors to explore the preferences for end-of-life care with their patients, and people close to the patients. Physicians, however, tend to overestimate life expectancy, and miss the window of opportunity to initiate Advance Care Planning. This research tests the potential of using machine learning and natural language processing techniques for predicting life expectancy from electronic medical records.

methodsWe approached the task of predicting life expectancy as a supervised machine learning task. We trained and tested a long short-term memory recurrent neural network on the medical records of deceased patients. We developed the model with a ten-fold cross-validation procedure, and evaluated its performance on a held-out set of test data. We compared the performance of a model which does not use text features (baseline model) to the performance of a model which uses features extracted from the free texts of the medical records (keyword model), and to doctors' performance on a similar task as described in scientific literature.

resultsBoth doctors and the baseline model were correct in 20% of the cases, taking a margin of 33% around the actual life expectancy as the target. The keyword model, in comparison, attained an accuracy of 29% with its prognoses. While doctors overestimated life expectancy in 63% of the incorrect prognoses, which harms anticipation to appropriate end-of-life care, the keyword model overestimated life expectancy in only 31% of the incorrect prognoses.

conclusionsPrognostication of life expectancy is difficult for humans. Our research shows that machine learning and natural language processing techniques offer a feasible and promising approach to predicting life expectancy. The research has potential for real-life applications, such as supporting timely recognition of the right moment to start Advance Care Planning.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningElectronic Health RecordsLife ExpectancyNatural Language ProcessingNeural Networks, ComputerSupervised Machine LearningHumansPrognosisAdvance care planningClinical free-textLife expectancy predictionLong short-term memory

Identifiers

PMID30819172
PMCPMC6394008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.