Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34922532›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical informatics and decision making2021

The prediction of hospital length of stay using unstructured data.

Jan Chrusciel, François Girardon, Lucien Roquette, David Laplanche, Antoine Duclos, Stéphane Sanchez

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Determinants of Length of Stay for Medical Inpatients Using Survival Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

6 authors.

Jan ChruscielPôle Territorial Santé Publique et Performance, Centre Hospitalier de Troyes, 101 Avenue Anatole France CS 10718, 10003, Troyes Cedex, France.
François GirardonResearch and Consulting, CODOC SAS, 75008, Paris, France.
Lucien RoquetteResearch and Consulting, CODOC SAS, 75008, Paris, France.
David LaplanchePôle Territorial Santé Publique et Performance, Centre Hospitalier de Troyes, 101 Avenue Anatole France CS 10718, 10003, Troyes Cedex, France.
Antoine DuclosResearch on Healthcare Performance Lab, INSERM U1290 RESHAPE, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France.
Stéphane SanchezPôle Territorial Santé Publique et Performance, Centre Hospitalier de Troyes, 101 Avenue Anatole France CS 10718, 10003, Troyes Cedex, France. stephane.sanchez@ch-troyes.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-0925-6948

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to assess the performance improvement for machine learning-based hospital length of stay (LOS) predictions when clinical signs written in text are accounted for and compared to the traditional approach of solely considering structured information such as age, gender and major ICD diagnosis.

methodsThis study was an observational retrospective cohort study and analyzed patient stays admitted between 1 January to 24 September 2019. For each stay, a patient was admitted through the Emergency Department (ED) and stayed for more than two days in the subsequent service. LOS was predicted using two random forest models. The first included unstructured text extracted from electronic health records (EHRs). A word-embedding algorithm based on UMLS terminology with exact matching restricted to patient-centric affirmation sentences was used to assess the EHR data. The second model was primarily based on structured data in the form of diagnoses coded from the International Classification of Disease 10th Edition (ICD-10) and triage codes (CCMU/GEMSA classifications). Variables common to both models were: age, gender, zip/postal code, LOS in the ED, recent visit flag, assigned patient ward after the ED stay and short-term ED activity. Models were trained on 80% of data and performance was evaluated by accuracy on the remaining 20% test data.

resultsThe model using unstructured data had a 75.0% accuracy compared to 74.1% for the model containing structured data. The two models produced a similar prediction in 86.6% of cases. In a secondary analysis restricted to intensive care patients, the accuracy of both models was also similar (76.3% vs 75.0%).

conclusionsLOS prediction using unstructured data had similar accuracy to using structured data and can be considered of use to accurately model LOS.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalHospitalizationHospitalsHumansLength of StayRetrospective StudiesData miningEmergency departmentHealth services researchLength of stay

Identifiers

PMID34922532
PMCPMC8684269

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.