ArticleArtificial intelligence in medicine2023
Personalized event prediction for Electronic Health Records.
Article in Artificial intelligence in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical event sequences consist of hundreds of clinical events that represent records of patient care in time. Developing accurate predictive models of such sequences is of a great importance for supporting a variety of models for interpreting/classifying the current patient condition, or predicting adverse clinical events and outcomes, all aimed to improve patient care. One important challenge of learning predictive models of clinical sequences is their patient-specific variability. Based on underlying clinical conditions, each patient's sequence may consist of different sets of clinical events (observations, lab results, medications, procedures). Hence, simple population-wide models learned from event sequences for many different patients may not accurately predict patient-specific dynamics of event sequences and their differences. To address the problem, we propose and investigate multiple new event sequence prediction models and methods that let us better adjust the prediction for individual patients and their specific conditions. The methods developed in this work pursue refinement of population-wide models to subpopulations, self-adaptation, and a meta-level model switching that is able to adaptively select the model with the best chance to support the immediate prediction. We analyze and test the performance of these models on clinical event sequences of patients in MIMIC-III database.
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.