ArticleBMC emergency medicine2024
Machine learning models for predicting unscheduled return visits to an emergency department: a scoping review.
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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Meta-Analysis of the Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Emergency Department Revisits.Journal of medical systems · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of a Generative Medical Event Foundation Model for Predicting Post-Discharge Trajectories in Emergency Department Abdominal Pain.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- SeqBoost: a sequential explainable model for predicting ED revisits within 72 hours.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- A real-world feasibility evaluation of LLM-based clinical prediction: emergency department return visit admission across two academic medical centers.Research square · 2026Article
- Explainable AI for mental health emergency returns: integrating large language models with predictive modeling.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Deep Learning for Emergency Department Sustainability: Interpretable Prediction of Revisit.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Observational
- Deep learning to predict emergency department revisit using static and dynamic features (Deep Revisit): development and validation study.BioData mining · 2025Article
- Multimorbidity measurement strategies for predicting hospital visits.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Smart emergency care: a narrative review of predictive machine learning models.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven forecasting and shift optimization for pediatric emergency department crowding.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions of Artificial Intelligence in Emergency Medicine: A Narrative Review.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Performance comparison of artificial intelligence models in predicting 72-h emergency department unscheduled return visits.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
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
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.