Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38287243›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2024

Machine learning models for predicting unscheduled return visits to an emergency department: a scoping review.

Yi-Chih Lee, Chip-Jin Ng, Chun-Chuan Hsu, Chien-Wei Cheng, Shou-Yen Chen

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Yi-Chih LeeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, College of Medicine, Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
Chip-Jin NgDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, College of Medicine, Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
Chun-Chuan HsuDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, College of Medicine, Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
Chien-Wei ChengDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung and Chang Gung University, College of Medicine, No. 5 Fushing St., Gueishan Shiang, Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
Shou-Yen ChenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, College of Medicine, Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan. allendream0621@yahoo.com.tw.

Funding

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital CMRPG3M0491
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnscheduled return visits (URVs) to emergency departments (EDs) are used to assess the quality of care in EDs. Machine learning (ML) models can incorporate a wide range of complex predictors to identify high-risk patients and reduce errors to save time and cost. However, the accuracy and practicality of such models are questionable. This review compares the predictive power of multiple ML models and examines the effects of multiple research factors on these models' performance in predicting URVs to EDs.

methodsWe conducted the present scoping review by searching eight databases for data from 2010 to 2023. The criteria focused on eligible articles that used ML to predict ED return visits. The primary outcome was the predictive performances of the ML models, and results were analyzed on the basis of intervals of return visits, patient population, and research scale.

resultsA total of 582 articles were identified through the database search, with 14 articles selected for detailed analysis. Logistic regression was the most widely used method; however, eXtreme Gradient Boosting generally exhibited superior performance. Variations in visit interval, target group, and research scale did not significantly affect the predictive power of the models.

conclusionThis is the first study to summarize the use of ML for predicting URVs in ED patients. The development of practical ML prediction models for ED URVs is feasible, but improving the accuracy of predicting ED URVs to beyond 0.75 remains a challenge. Including multiple data sources and dimensions is key for enabling ML models to achieve high accuracy; however, such inclusion could be challenging within a limited timeframe. The application of ML models for predicting ED URVs may improve patient safety and reduce medical costs by decreasing the frequency of URVs. Further research is necessary to explore the real-world efficacy of ML models.

Indexed as

Machine LearningPatient ReadmissionEmergency Service, HospitalHumansLogistic ModelsTime FactorsEmergency departmentMachine learningReattendanceUnscheduled return visit

Identifiers

PMID38287243
PMCPMC10826225

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.