ArticleCureus2025
Forecasting Emergency Room Patient Volumes Using Extreme Gradient Boosting With Temporal and Seasonal Feature Engineering: A Comparative Study Across Hospitals.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAccurate forecasting of emergency department (ED) patient volumes is critical for optimizing hospital resource allocation and staffing. This preliminary study evaluates the performance of an eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost)-based regression model in predicting daily ED visit counts across three simulated hospitals, using time-series features derived from synthetic hospital data retrieved from a publicly available Kaggle dataset (n=300).
methodsFor each hospital, we trained an XGBoost model using engineered temporal features, recent lagged values, and rolling averages of past patient volumes. Feature engineering included day of the week, month, week of the year, quarter of the year, and weekend status. Model performance was benchmarked against three general baselines: a naive lag-1 predictor, a constant mean predictor, and a three-day rolling mean. Performance was assessed using mean squared error (MSE), root MSE (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and R² score.
resultsThe XGBoost model consistently outperformed all baseline methods across all hospitals. For Hospital 101, it achieved an R² of 0.55 compared to 0.27 for the rolling mean and negative R² values for naive and mean baselines. Hospital 102 showed improved accuracy with an R² of 0.69 versus 0.12 for the rolling mean. The best performance was observed at Hospital 103, where XGBoost achieved an R² of 0.81, significantly outperforming all baselines. Across all sites, XGBoost reduced RMSE and MAE by more than 40% relative to the best-performing baseline.
conclusionLeveraging temporal and historical patterns in simulated ED data, the XGBoost model delivers markedly more accurate volume forecasts than traditional baseline methods. These findings on synthetic data support the potential for machine learning-based forecasting models in enhancing hospital operational decision-making, with future directions involving the use of real-world hospital data.
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.