ArticleJAMIA open2025
Predicting falls using electronic health records: a time series approach.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI Cautionary Guide: Pitfalls and Strategies for the Use of Machine Learning in Medical Research.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- New 10-Year Atherosclerosis Cardiovascular Disease Risk Score for Asian and American Indian Women Service Members.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- Pressure Injury Risk Assessment in Nursing Practice: A Head-to-Head Comparison of the Braden Scale and Machine Learning Models.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop a more accurate fall prediction model within the Veterans Health Administration. Materials and Methods: The cohort included Veterans admitted to a Veterans Health Administration acute care setting from July 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022, with a length of stay between 1 and 7 days. Demographic and clinical data were obtained through electronic health records. Veterans were identified as having a documented fall through clinical progress notes. A transformer model was used to obtain features of this data, which was then used to train a Light Gradient-Boosting Machine for classification and prediction. Area under the precision-recall curve assisted in model tuning, with geometric mean used to define an optimal classification threshold. Results: Among 242,844 Veterans assessed, 5965 (2.5%) were documented as having a fall during their clinical stay. Employing a transformer model with a Light Gradient-Boosting Machine resulted in an area under the curve of .851 and an area under the precision-recall curve of .285. With an accuracy of 76.3%, the model resulted in a specificity of 76.2% and a sensitivity of 77.3%. Discussion: Prior evaluations have highlighted limitations of the Morse Fall Scale (MFS) in accurately assessing fall risk. Developing a time series classification model using existing electronic health record data, our model outperformed traditional MFS-based evaluations and other fall-risk models. Future work is necessary to address limitations, including class imbalance and the need for prospective validation. Conclusion: An improvement over the MFS, this model, automatically calculated from existing data, can provide a more efficient and accurate means for identifying patients at risk of fall.
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.