Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42035291›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026

Optimizing temporal windows for wearable-augmented post-discharge risk prediction: a methods study.

Eric Bressman, Sae-Hwan Park, S Ryan Greysen, Jinbo Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Eric BressmanDepartment of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4688-0747
Sae-Hwan ParkCenter for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5297-5502
S Ryan GreysenDepartment of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, United States.
Jinbo ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, United States.

Funding

University of Pennsylvania's Division of General Internal Medicine
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTraditional readmission risk models relying on static discharge data have limited predictive performance and fail to capture patients' recovery trajectories after hospitalization. We sought to identify optimal modeling parameters for dynamically predicting readmission risk using post-discharge step-count data from remote monitoring devices.

methodsWe combined data for adults aged 55+ from 2 studies that collected longitudinal activity data after discharge. We constructed a patient-day dataset incorporating static demographic and clinical variables and dynamic activity features aggregated over retrospective windows of 3, 5, 7, or 10 days. Models predicted readmission or death over prospective horizons of 3, 5, 7, or 10 days, within follow-up periods of 30-180 days. Logistic regression and LightGBM models were trained using 5-fold cross-validation on an 80:20 patient-level split.

resultsAmong 215 participants, LightGBM outperformed logistic regression across all configurations (mean AUC 0.82 vs 0.76). Performance improved with longer prospective horizons but was insensitive to retrospective window length. The LightGBM model was well-calibrated (Hosmer-Lemeshow χ2 = 2.46, P = .96), whereas logistic regression showed miscalibration (χ2 = 51.8, P < .001). In feature-importance analyses, LightGBM ranked static (length of stay, vitals, BMI) and activity (recent steps, distance) features highly, whereas logistic regression emphasized activity variables. DISCUSSION: Prediction performance was impacted by horizon length and training window, with minimal effect of retrospective window. LightGBM achieved better discrimination and calibration, supporting flexible, non-parametric methods for post-discharge risk prediction.

conclusionPost-discharge step count data enhance dynamic readmission risk prediction. Optimizing temporal windows and model type improves discrimination and calibration.

Indexed as

Patient DischargePatient ReadmissionWearable Electronic DevicesAgedBoosting Machine Learning AlgorithmsFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPrediction AlgorithmsPredictive Learning ModelsRemote Patient MonitoringRisk AssessmentTime Factorsmachine learningremote patient monitoringTransitions of Carewearable devices

Identifiers

PMID42035291
PMCPMC13317956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.