Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38971198›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology2024

Validation of an Electronic Health Record-Based Machine Learning Model Compared With Clinical Risk Scores for Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Dennis L Shung, Colleen E Chan, Kisung You, Shinpei Nakamura, Theo Saarinen, Neil S Zheng, Michael Simonov, Darrick K Li, Cynthia Tsay, Yuki Kawamura and 4 more

Abstract readValidation StudyComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

14 authors.

Dennis L ShungSection of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Clinical and Translational Research Accelerator, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Biomedical Informatics and Data Science, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Electronic address: dennis.shung@yale.edu.
Colleen E ChanDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Kisung YouDepartment of Mathematics, City University of New York, Baruch College, New York, New York.
Shinpei NakamuraDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Theo SaarinenDepartment of Statistics, University of Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
Neil S ZhengSection of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Michael SimonovTruveta, Bellevue, Washington.
Darrick K LiSection of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Cynthia TsayDepartment of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Yuki KawamuraUniversity of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Matthew ShenDepartment of Statistics, University of Berkeley, Berkeley, California.
Allen HsiaoSection of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Jasjeet S SekhonClinical and Translational Research Accelerator, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Political Science, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Loren LaineSection of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; West Haven Veterans Affairs Medical Center, West Haven, Connecticut.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Short Term Research Training: Students in Health Professional SchoolsT35DK104689 · NIDDK · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI LLOYD G CANTLEY, Sarwat I Chaudhry · 2015 to 2026
$2.6M
Deep Learning Approaches to Risk Stratification in Acute Gastrointestinal BleedingK23DK125718 · NIDDK · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI SHUNG, DENNIS · 2021 to 2025
$969k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK125718NIDDK NIH HHS T35 DK104689
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsGuidelines recommend use of risk stratification scores for patients presenting with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) to identify very-low-risk patients eligible for discharge from emergency departments. Machine learning models may outperform existing scores and can be integrated within the electronic health record (EHR) to provide real-time risk assessment without manual data entry. We present the first EHR-based machine learning model for GIB.

methodsThe training cohort comprised 2546 patients and internal validation of 850 patients presenting with overt GIB (ie, hematemesis, melena, and hematochezia) to emergency departments of 2 hospitals from 2014 to 2019. External validation was performed on 926 patients presenting to a different hospital with the same EHR from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome was a composite of red blood cell transfusion, hemostatic intervention (ie, endoscopic, interventional radiologic, or surgical), and 30-day all-cause mortality. We used structured data fields in the EHR, available within 4 hours of presentation, and compared the performance of machine learning models with current guideline-recommended risk scores, Glasgow-Blatchford Score, and Oakland Score. Primary analysis was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Secondary analysis was specificity at 99% sensitivity to assess the proportion of patients correctly identified as very low risk.

resultsThe machine learning model outperformed the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.92 vs 0.89; P < .001) and Oakland Score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.92 vs 0.89; P < .001). At the very-low-risk threshold of 99% sensitivity, the machine learning model identified more very-low-risk patients: 37.9% vs 18.5% for Glasgow-Blatchford Score and 11.7% for Oakland Score (P < .001 for both comparisons).

conclusionsAn EHR-based machine learning model performs better than currently recommended clinical risk scores and identifies more very-low-risk patients eligible for discharge from the emergency department.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsGastrointestinal HemorrhageMachine LearningAgedDecision Support TechniquesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsROC CurveElectronic Health RecordGastrointestinal HemorrhageMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID38971198
PMCPMC11493512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.