Machine learning approaches to predict peak demand days of cardiovascular admissions considering environmental exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence has linked environmental exposure, such as ambient air pollution and meteorological factors, to the development and severity of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), resulting in increased healthcare demand. Effective prediction of demand for healthcare services, particularly those associated with peak events of CVDs, can be useful in optimizing the allocation of medical resources. However, few studies have attempted to adopt machine learning approaches with excellent predictive abilities to forecast the healthcare demand for CVDs. This study aims to develop and compare several machine learning models in predicting the peak demand days of CVDs admissions using the hospital admissions data, air quality data and meteorological data in Chengdu, China from 2015 to 2017. METHODS: Six machine learning algorithms, including logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), artificial neural network (ANN), random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM) were applied to build the predictive models with a unique feature set. The area under a receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), logarithmic loss function, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1 score were used to evaluate the predictive performances of the six models. RESULTS: The LightGBM model exhibited the highest AUC (0.940, 95% CI: 0.900-0.980), which was significantly higher than that of LR (0.842, 95% CI: 0.783-0.901), SVM (0.834, 95% CI: 0.774-0.894) and ANN (0.890, 95% CI: 0.836-0.944), but did not differ significantly from that of RF (0.926, 95% CI: 0.879-0.974) and XGBoost (0.930, 95% CI: 0.878-0.982). In addition, the LightGBM has the optimal logarithmic loss function (0.218), accuracy (91.3%), specificity (94.1%), precision (0.695), and F1 score (0.725). Feature importance identification indicated that the contribution rate of meteorological conditions and air pollutants for the prediction was 32 and 43%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that ensemble learning models, especially the LightGBM model, can be used to effectively predict the peak events of CVDs admissions, and therefore could be a very useful decision-making tool for medical resource management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".