IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pdig00/0000606.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aspiring to clinical significance: Insights from developing and evaluating a machine learning model to predict emergency department return visit admissions

Author

Listed:
  • Yiye Zhang
  • Yufang Huang
  • Anthony Rosen
  • Lynn G Jiang
  • Matthew McCarty
  • Arindam RoyChoudhury
  • Jin Ho Han
  • Adam Wright
  • Jessica S Ancker
  • Peter AD Steel

Abstract

Return visit admissions (RVA), which are instances where patients discharged from the emergency department (ED) rapidly return and require hospital admission, have been associated with quality issues and adverse outcomes. We developed and validated a machine learning model to predict 72-hour RVA using electronic health records (EHR) data. Study data were extracted from EHR data in 2019 from three urban EDs. The development and independent validation datasets included 62,154 patients from two EDs and 73,453 patients from one ED, respectively. Multiple machine learning algorithms were evaluated, including deep significance clustering (DICE), regularized logistic regression (LR), Gradient Boosting Decision Tree, and XGBoost. These machine learning models were also compared against an existing clinical risk score. To support clinical actionability, clinician investigators conducted manual chart reviews of the cases identified by the model. Chart reviews categorized predicted cases across index ED discharge diagnosis and RVA root cause classifications. The best-performing model achieved an AUC of 0.87 in the development site (test set) and 0.75 in the independent validation set. The model, which combined DICE and LR, boosted predictive performance while providing well-defined features. The model was relatively robust to sensitivity analyses regarding performance across age, race, and by varying predictor availability but less robust across diagnostic groups. Clinician examination demonstrated discrete model performance characteristics within clinical subtypes of RVA. This machine learning model demonstrated a strong predictive performance for 72- RVA. Despite the limited clinical actionability potentially due to model complexity, the rarity of the outcome, and variable relevance, the clinical examination offered guidance on further variable inclusion for enhanced predictive accuracy and actionability.Author summary: This study developed a model to predict emergency department (ED) return visit admissions (RVA) which are clinical events in which patients discharged from the ED rapidly return and require hospital admission. RVA are multifactorial but have been associated with preventable adverse outcomes. We developed a predictive model by evaluating several machine learning techniques and compared this to an existing clinical score. The model drew data from electronic health records at three urban EDs. Clinicians conducted a clinical evaluation of the model input and output through manual chart reviews. The model was found to be predictive and fairly generalizable but lacked clinical actionability. Findings will inform future model development process by ensuring that we include variables are that predictive and explainable to clinicians in a way that leads to actionability.

Suggested Citation

  • Yiye Zhang & Yufang Huang & Anthony Rosen & Lynn G Jiang & Matthew McCarty & Arindam RoyChoudhury & Jin Ho Han & Adam Wright & Jessica S Ancker & Peter AD Steel, 2024. "Aspiring to clinical significance: Insights from developing and evaluating a machine learning model to predict emergency department return visit admissions," PLOS Digital Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(9), pages 1-18, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0000606
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000606
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000606&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000606?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shiying Hao & Bo Jin & Andrew Young Shin & Yifan Zhao & Chunqing Zhu & Zhen Li & Zhongkai Hu & Changlin Fu & Jun Ji & Yong Wang & Yingzhen Zhao & Dorothy Dai & Devore S Culver & Shaun T Alfreds & Todd, 2014. "Risk Prediction of Emergency Department Revisit 30 Days Post Discharge: A Prospective Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-13, November.
    2. repec:plo:pone00:0123660 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jacques-Henri Veyron & Patrick Friocourt & Olivier Jeanjean & Laurence Luquel & Nicolas Bonifas & Fabrice Denis & Joël Belmin, 2019. "Home care aides’ observations and machine learning algorithms for the prediction of visits to emergency departments by older community-dwelling individuals receiving home care assistance: A proof of c," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Chien-Lung Chan & Wender Lin & Nan-Ping Yang & K Robert Lai & Hsin-Tsung Huang, 2015. "Pre-Emergency-Department Care-Seeking Patterns Are Associated with the Severity of Presenting Condition for Emergency Department Visit and Subsequent Adverse Events: A Timeframe Episode Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    3. Shiying Hao & Yue Wang & Bo Jin & Andrew Young Shin & Chunqing Zhu & Min Huang & Le Zheng & Jin Luo & Zhongkai Hu & Changlin Fu & Dorothy Dai & Yicheng Wang & Devore S Culver & Shaun T Alfreds & Todd , 2015. "Development, Validation and Deployment of a Real Time 30 Day Hospital Readmission Risk Assessment Tool in the Maine Healthcare Information Exchange," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-15, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pdig00:0000606. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: digitalhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.