ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2023
Graph-based clinical recommender: Predicting specialists procedure orders using graph representation learning.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Streamlining evidence based clinical recommendations with large language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- The promises and limitations of artificial intelligence for quality improvement, patient safety, and research in hospital medicine.Journal of hospital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether graph neural network based models of electronic health records can predict specialty consultation care needs for endocrinology and hematology more accurately than the standard of care checklists and other conventional medical recommendation algorithms in the literature.
methodsDemand for medical expertise far outstrips supply, with tens of millions in the US alone with deficient access to specialty care. Rather than potentially months long delays to initiate diagnostic workup and medical treatment with a specialist, referring primary care supported by an automated recommender algorithm could anticipate and directly initiate patient evaluation that would otherwise be needed at subsequent a specialist appointment. We propose a novel graph representation learning approach with a heterogeneous graph neural network to model structured electronic health records and formulate recommendation/prediction of subsequent specialist orders as a link prediction problem.
resultsModels are trained and assessed in two specialty care sites: endocrinology and hematology. Our experimental results show that our model achieves an 8% improvement in ROC-AUC for endocrinology (ROC-AUC = 0.88) and 5% improvement for hematology (ROC-AUC = 0.84) personalized procedure recommendations over prior medical recommender systems. These recommender algorithm approaches provide medical procedure recommendations for endocrinology referrals more effectively than manual clinical checklists (recommender: precision = 0.60, recall = 0.27, F1-score = 0.37) vs. (checklist: precision = 0.16, recall = 0.28, F1-score = 0.20), and similarly for hematology referrals (recommender: precision = 0.44, recall = 0.38, F1-score = 0.41) vs. (checklist: precision = 0.27, recall = 0.71, F1-score = 0.39).
conclusionEmbedding graph neural network models into clinical care can improve digital specialty consultation systems and expand the access to medical experience of prior similar cases.
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.