Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Hospital readmission rates vary widely across regions and hospitals, suggesting that improvements are possible. To provide an incentive to improve quality of care, some jurisdictions have introduced legislation that financially penalizes hospitals with high readmission rates, but the models used to implement the legislation crudely adjusts for patient-mix. Additionally, hospitals have developed predictive models of readmission risk to better target enhanced transitional care. In this work, I examined how large healthcare administrative databases can help build better inferential and predictive models of hospital readmissions. To target interventions at those patients with the highest readmission risk, hospitals can develop predictive models of readmission based on their own data (local models), they can pool their data with other hospitals (global models) or they can use sophisticated model combination techniques which avoid directly sharing patient data (combined models). In the first manuscript, I compared the accuracy of global, combined, and local models in predicting 30-day readmission risk, and found that the predictive accuracy of models developed with the three approaches were similar, suggesting that hospitals can use their own data to accurately predict hospital readmissions. Although predictive models of hospital readmissions can be useful to guide resources to individual high-risk cases, inferential models can potentially lead to population-level interventions. In the second manuscript, I studied how the day-of-week of discharge affects readmission, and used both empiric (survival model) and analytic (Markov model) approaches to study how this effect is confounded by the probability of admission on the weekend. I found that not only are Friday discharges more likely to be readmitted than Wednesday discharges, but also that the low probability of weekend admissions attenuates this effect if uncontrolled. Our results suggest that interventions that reduce the effect of Friday discharge on readmissions, such as increased weekend staffing, are likely to be more cost-effective than previous work has indicated.In the third manuscript, I compare two techniques to measure the effect of twenty Montreal hospitals on readmissions: a standard regression approach that controls for the major, well-known confounders, and targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) where I could control for pre-admission diagnoses, procedures, and drug prescriptions using a machine learning technique (random forest). The standard model suggested that there was little difference between the hospitals, but the TMLE model showed that the confounders, particularly drug prescriptions, strongly confounded readmission risk, and revealed a wide variation in readmission risk between the hospitals. My work suggests that: 1) predictive models of readmission are unlikely to be greatly improved by pooling hospital data or by using complex combination techniques, 2) inference on the causes of readmissions, particularly the day-of-week, can be confounded by the admission process, and 3) by using TMLE, the predictive power of machine learning techniques can be used to improve inference by reducing bias in our estimates of the effect of hospital care on readmissions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,023 | 0,109 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».