ArticleScientific reports2026
A comparative evaluation of time-series models for forecasting inpatient deaths and discharges against medical advice.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
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
Forecasting inpatient mortality (IM) and discharges against medical advice (DAMA) provides essential insights for healthcare quality monitoring and hospital management. This study compared six time-series forecasting methods-ARIMA, Grey Model, NNETAR, LSTM, Prophet, and Chronos, a pretrained probabilistic model-to predict monthly IM and DAMA in two tertiary hospitals in China from January 2018 to December 2024. Model performance was evaluated using RMSE, MAE, MAPE. Chronos demonstrated the best predictive accuracy for IM across both hospitals, achieving the lowest MAPE values (26.96-33.37%) and outperforming traditional and deep learning approaches (Diebold-Mariano test, p < 0.05). For DAMA forecasting, Chronos performed optimally (MAPE = 5.52%) in the hospital with higher and more stable DAMA volumes, whereas NNETAR yielded relatively superior results (MAPE = 11.29%) in the hospital with smaller and more irregular time series. LSTM consistently showed limited generalizability, likely due to small sample sizes and model complexity. These findings indicate that pretrained models such as Chronos can deliver robust and scalable forecasting performance even with limited data, while simpler neural networks like NNETAR may better handle low-volume, noisy data. Implementing these models in hospital management systems could enhance the timeliness and precision of quality monitoring, enabling proactive responses to adverse clinical and operational trends.
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.