ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
A deep learning model for clinical outcome prediction using longitudinal inpatient electronic health records.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Recent advances in deep learning show significant potential in analyzing continuous monitoring electronic health records (EHR) data for clinical outcome prediction. We aim to develop a Transformer-based, Encounter-level Clinical Outcome (TECO) model to predict mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) using inpatient EHR data. Materials and Methods: TECO was developed using multiple baseline and time-dependent clinical variables from 2579 hospitalized COVID-19 patients to predict ICU mortality, and was validated externally in an ARDS cohort (n=2799) and a sepsis cohort (n=6622) from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV. Model performance was evaluated based on area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) and compared with Epic Deterioration Index (EDI), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). Results: In the COVID-19 development dataset, TECO achieved higher AUC (0.89-0.97) across various time intervals compared to EDI (0.86-0.95), RF (0.87-0.96), and XGBoost (0.88-0.96). In the two MIMIC testing datasets (EDI not available), TECO yielded higher AUC (0.65-0.76) than RF (0.57-0.73) and XGBoost (0.57-0.73). In addition, TECO was able to identify clinically interpretable features that were correlated with the outcome. Discussion: TECO outperformed proprietary metrics and conventional machine learning models in predicting ICU mortality among COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: TECO demonstrates a strong capability for predicting ICU mortality using continuous monitoring data. While further validation is needed, TECO has the potential to serve as a powerful early warning tool across various diseases in inpatient settings.
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.