ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2021
Interpretable disease prediction using heterogeneous patient records with self-attentive fusion encoder.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Enhancing Patient Outcome Prediction Through Deep Learning With Sequential Diagnosis Codes From Structured Electronic Health Record Data: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of trajectory analysis for disease risk assessment: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- A hierarchical multilabel graph attention network method to predict the deterioration paths of chronic hepatitis B patients.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe propose an interpretable disease prediction model that efficiently fuses multiple types of patient records using a self-attentive fusion encoder. We assessed the model performance in predicting cardiovascular disease events, given the records of a general patient population. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe extracted 798111 ses and 67 623 controls from the sample cohort database and nationwide healthcare claims data of South Korea. Among the information provided, our model used the sequential records of medical codes and patient characteristics, such as demographic profiles and the most recent health examination results. These two types of patient records were combined in our self-attentive fusion module, whereas previously dominant methods aggregated them using a simple concatenation. The prediction performance was compared to state-of-the-art recurrent neural network-based approaches and other widely used machine learning approaches.
resultsOur model outperformed all the other compared methods in predicting cardiovascular disease events. It achieved an area under the curve of 0.839, while the other compared methods achieved between 0.74111 d 0.830. Moreover, our model consistently outperformed the other methods in a more challenging setting in which we tested the model's ability to draw an inference from more nonobvious, diverse factors. DISCUSSION: We also interpreted the attention weights provided by our model as the relative importance of each time step in the sequence. We showed that our model reveals the informative parts of the patients' history by measuring the attention weights.
conclusionWe suggest an interpretable disease prediction model that efficiently fuses heterogeneous patient records and demonstrates superior disease prediction performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.