Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38531676›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024

Preparing for the bedside-optimizing a postpartum depression risk prediction model for clinical implementation in a health system.

Yifan Liu, Rochelle Joly, Meghan Reading Turchioe, Natalie Benda, Alison Hermann, Ashley Beecy, Jyotishman Pathak, Yiye Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 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. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Implementation of a Machine Learning Risk Prediction Model for Postpartum Depression in the Electronic Health Records.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2024
    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

8 authors.

Yifan LiuDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1785-4614
Rochelle JolyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, United States.
Meghan Reading TurchioeColumbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6264-6320
Natalie BendaColumbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, United States.
Alison HermannDepartment of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, United States.
Ashley BeecyDepartment of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, United States.
Jyotishman PathakDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, United States.
Yiye ZhangDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY 10065, United States.

Funding

Risk modeling and shared decision making for postpartum depressionR41MH124581 · NIMH · IRIS OB HEALTH INC. · PI LASKOFF, MICHAEL B., PATHAK, JYOTISHMAN · 2021 to 2022
$1.0M
Center for Transportation, Environment, and Community Health New Research Initiatives FundNational Institutes of Health Small Business Technology Transfer Fund 5R41MH124581-02NIH HHS 5R41MH124581-02NIMH NIH HHS R41 MH124581
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe developed and externally validated a machine-learning model to predict postpartum depression (PPD) using data from electronic health records (EHRs). Effort is under way to implement the PPD prediction model within the EHR system for clinical decision support. We describe the pre-implementation evaluation process that considered model performance, fairness, and clinical appropriateness. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used EHR data from an academic medical center (AMC) and a clinical research network database from 2014 to 2020 to evaluate the predictive performance and net benefit of the PPD risk model. We used area under the curve and sensitivity as predictive performance and conducted a decision curve analysis. In assessing model fairness, we employed metrics such as disparate impact, equal opportunity, and predictive parity with the White race being the privileged value. The model was also reviewed by multidisciplinary experts for clinical appropriateness. Lastly, we debiased the model by comparing 5 different debiasing approaches of fairness through blindness and reweighing.

resultsWe determined the classification threshold through a performance evaluation that prioritized sensitivity and decision curve analysis. The baseline PPD model exhibited some unfairness in the AMC data but had a fair performance in the clinical research network data. We revised the model by fairness through blindness, a debiasing approach that yielded the best overall performance and fairness, while considering clinical appropriateness suggested by the expert reviewers. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionThe findings emphasize the need for a thorough evaluation of intervention-specific models, considering predictive performance, fairness, and appropriateness before clinical implementation.

Indexed as

Depression, PostpartumElectronic Health RecordsMachine LearningDecision Support Systems, ClinicalFemaleHumansRisk Assessmentelectronic health recordhealth equitymachine learning implementationpostpartum depression

Identifiers

PMID38531676
PMCPMC11105144

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.