Marcel Lucas Chee

Feng Xie, Jun Zhou, Jin Wee Lee et al.

The demand for emergency department (ED) services is increasing across the globe, particularly during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical triage and risk assessment have become increasingly challenging due to the shortage of medical resources and the strain on hospital infrastructure caused by the pandemic. As a result of the widespread use of electronic health records (EHRs), we now have access to a vast amount of clinical data, which allows us to develop predictive models and decision support systems to address these challenges. To date, however, there are no widely accepted benchmark ED triage prediction models based on large-scale public EHR data. An open-source benchmarking platform would streamline research workflows by eliminating cumbersome data preprocessing, and facilitate comparisons among different studies and methodologies. In this paper, based on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV Emergency Department (MIMIC-IV-ED) database, we developed a publicly available benchmark suite for ED triage predictive models and created a benchmark dataset that contains over 400,000 ED visits from 2011 to 2019. We introduced three ED-based outcomes (hospitalization, critical outcomes, and 72-hour ED reattendance) and implemented a variety of popular methodologies, ranging from machine learning methods to clinical scoring systems. We evaluated and compared the performance of these methods against benchmark tasks. Our codes are open-source, allowing anyone with MIMIC-IV-ED data access to perform the same steps in data processing, benchmark model building, and experiments. This study provides future researchers with insights, suggestions, and protocols for managing raw data and developing risk triaging tools for emergency care.

Han Yuan, Feng Xie, Marcus Eng Hock Ong et al.

Background: Medical decision-making impacts both individual and public health. Clinical scores are commonly used among a wide variety of decision-making models for determining the degree of disease deterioration at the bedside. AutoScore was proposed as a useful clinical score generator based on machine learning and a generalized linear model. Its current framework, however, still leaves room for improvement when addressing unbalanced data of rare events. Methods: Using machine intelligence approaches, we developed AutoScore-Imbalance, which comprises three components: training dataset optimization, sample weight optimization, and adjusted AutoScore. All scoring models were evaluated on the basis of their area under the curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristic analysis and balanced accuracy (i.e., mean value of sensitivity and specificity). By utilizing a publicly accessible dataset from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, we assessed the proposed model and baseline approaches in the prediction of inpatient mortality. Results: AutoScore-Imbalance outperformed baselines in terms of AUC and balanced accuracy. The nine-variable AutoScore-Imbalance sub-model achieved the highest AUC of 0.786 (0.732-0.839) while the eleven-variable original AutoScore obtained an AUC of 0.723 (0.663-0.783), and the logistic regression with 21 variables obtained an AUC of 0.743 (0.685-0.800). The AutoScore-Imbalance sub-model (using down-sampling algorithm) yielded an AUC of 0. 0.771 (0.718-0.823) with only five variables, demonstrating a good balance between performance and variable sparsity. Conclusions: The AutoScore-Imbalance tool has the potential to be applied to highly unbalanced datasets to gain further insight into rare medical events and to facilitate real-world clinical decision-making.