Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33461485›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021

A unified machine learning approach to time series forecasting applied to demand at emergency departments.

Michaela A C Vollmer, Ben Glampson, Thomas Mellan, Swapnil Mishra, Luca Mercuri, Ceire Costello, Robert Klaber, Graham Cooke, Seth Flaxman, Samir Bhatt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Forecasting hospital bed occupancy: a time series approach with prophet.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Analyzing and predicting patient admissions related to acute heat at the Chemnitz Hospital (Germany).Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors.

Michaela A C VollmerMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK. m.vollmer@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6970-7192
Ben GlampsonImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Thomas MellanMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Swapnil MishraMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Luca MercuriImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Ceire CostelloMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Robert KlaberImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Graham CookeImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Seth FlaxmanDepartment of Mathematics and Data Science Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Samir BhattMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R015600/1NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre MR/R015600/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere were 25.6 million attendances at Emergency Departments (EDs) in England in 2019 corresponding to an increase of 12 million attendances over the past ten years. The steadily rising demand at EDs creates a constant challenge to provide adequate quality of care while maintaining standards and productivity. Managing hospital demand effectively requires an adequate knowledge of the future rate of admission. We develop a novel predictive framework to understand the temporal dynamics of hospital demand.

methodsWe compare and combine state-of-the-art forecasting methods to predict hospital demand 1, 3 or 7 days into the future. In particular, our analysis compares machine learning algorithms to more traditional linear models as measured in a mean absolute error (MAE) and we consider two different hyperparameter tuning methods, enabling a faster deployment of our models without compromising performance. We believe our framework can readily be used to forecast a wide range of policy relevant indicators.

resultsWe find that linear models often outperform machine learning methods and that the quality of our predictions for any of the forecasting horizons of 1, 3 or 7 days are comparable as measured in MAE. Our approach is able to predict attendances at these emergency departments one day in advance up to a mean absolute error of ±14 and ±10 patients corresponding to a mean absolute percentage error of 6.8% and 8.6% respectively.

conclusionsSimple linear methods like generalized linear models are often better or at least as good as ensemble learning methods like the gradient boosting or random forest algorithm. However, though sophisticated machine learning methods are not necessarily better than linear models, they improve the diversity of model predictions so that stacked predictions can be more robust than any single model including the best performing one.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalMachine LearningForecastingHospitalizationHumansLinear ModelsEmergency department demandEnsemble predictionsMachine learningTime series analysis

Identifiers

PMID33461485
PMCPMC7812986

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.