Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38331816›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024

Prediction of emergency department revisits among child and youth mental health outpatients using deep learning techniques.

Simran Saggu, Hirad Daneshvar, Reza Samavi, Paulo Pires, Roberto B Sassi, Thomas E Doyle, Judy Zhao, Ahmad Mauluddin, Laura Duncan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

9 authors.

Simran SagguDepartment of Health Research Methodology, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Hirad DaneshvarDepartment of Electrical, Computer and Biomedical Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 2K3, Canada.
Reza SamaviDepartment of Electrical, Computer and Biomedical Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5B 2K3, Canada.
Paulo PiresDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Roberto B SassiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, UBC Vancouver Campus, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2A1, Canada.
Thomas E DoyleDepartment of Electrical & Computer Engineering, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Judy ZhaoMcMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton Health Sciences, 1200 Main St West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3Z5, Canada.
Ahmad MauluddinMcMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton Health Sciences, 1200 Main St West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3Z5, Canada.
Laura DuncanDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada. duncanlj@mcmaster.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-7120-6629

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe proportion of Canadian youth seeking mental health support from an emergency department (ED) has risen in recent years. As EDs typically address urgent mental health crises, revisiting an ED may represent unmet mental health needs. Accurate ED revisit prediction could aid early intervention and ensure efficient healthcare resource allocation. We examine the potential increased accuracy and performance of graph neural network (GNN) machine learning models compared to recurrent neural network (RNN), and baseline conventional machine learning and regression models for predicting ED revisit in electronic health record (EHR) data.

methodsThis study used EHR data for children and youth aged 4-17 seeking services at McMaster Children's Hospital's Child and Youth Mental Health Program outpatient service to develop and evaluate GNN and RNN models to predict whether a child/youth with an ED visit had an ED revisit within 30 days. GNN and RNN models were developed and compared against conventional baseline models. Model performance for GNN, RNN, XGBoost, decision tree and logistic regression models was evaluated using F1 scores.

resultsThe GNN model outperformed the RNN model by an F1-score increase of 0.0511 and the best performing conventional machine learning model by an F1-score increase of 0.0470. Precision, recall, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and positive and negative predictive values showed that the GNN model performed the best, and the RNN model performed similarly to the XGBoost model. Performance increases were most noticeable for recall and negative predictive value than for precision and positive predictive value.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates the improved accuracy and potential utility of GNN models in predicting ED revisits among children and youth, although model performance may not be sufficient for clinical implementation. Given the improvements in recall and negative predictive value, GNN models should be further explored to develop algorithms that can inform clinical decision-making in ways that facilitate targeted interventions, optimize resource allocation, and improve outcomes for children and youth.

Indexed as

Deep LearningHospitalizationAdolescentCanadaChildEmergency Service, HospitalHumansMental HealthOutpatientsDeep learningEmergency departmentGraph neural networkMachine learningMental healthPredictionRevisits

Identifiers

PMID38331816
PMCPMC10854017

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.