ArticleJAMIA open2025
Benchmarking of pre-training strategies for electronic health record foundation models.
Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extending BEHRT to UK Biobank: assessing transformer model performance in clinical prediction.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Cross-Cancer Transfer Learning for Gastric Cancer Risk Prediction from Electronic Health Records.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Our objective is to compare different pre-training strategies for electronic health record (EHR) foundation models. Materials and Methods: We evaluated three approaches using a transformer-based architecture: baseline (no pre-training), self-supervised pre-training with masked language modeling, and supervised pre-training. The models were assessed on their ability to predict both major adverse cardiac events and mortality occurring within 12 months. The pre-training cohort was 405 679 patients prescribed antihypertensives and the fine tuning cohort was 5525 patients who received doxorubicin. Results: Task-specific supervised pre-training achieved superior performance (AUROC 0.70, AUPRC 0.23), outperforming both self-supervised pre-training and the baseline. However, when the model was evaluated on the task of 12-month mortality prediction, the self-supervised model performed best. Discussion: While supervised pre-training excels when aligned with downstream tasks, self-supervised approaches offer more generalized utility. Conclusion: Pre-training strategy selection should consider intended applications, data availability, and transferability requirements.
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.