Predicting Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations. Developing a Population Surveillance Approach with Administrative Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Automatic prediction algorithms based on routinely collected health data may be able to identify patients at high risk for hospitalizations related to acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives To conduct a proof-of-concept study of a population surveillance approach for identifying individuals at high risk of severe COPD exacerbations. Methods We used British Columbia’s administrative health databases (1997–2016) to identify patients with diagnosed COPD. We used data from the previous 6 months to predict the risk of severe exacerbation in the next 2 months after a randomly selected index date. We applied statistical and machine-learning algorithms for risk prediction (logistic regression, random forest, neural network, and gradient boosting). We used calibration plots and receiver operating characteristic curves to evaluate model performance based on a randomly chosen future date at least 1 year later (temporal validation). Results There were 108,433 patients in the development dataset and 113,786 in the validation dataset; of these, 1,126 and 1,136, respectively, were hospitalized for COPD within their outcome windows. The best prediction algorithm (gradient boosting) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.80–0.83), which was significantly higher than the corresponding value for the model with exacerbation history as the only predictor (current standard of care: 0.68). The predicted risk scores were well calibrated in the validation dataset. Conclusions Imminent COPD-related hospitalizations can be predicted with good accuracy using administrative health data. This model may be used as a means to target high-risk patients for preventive exacerbation therapies.
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 | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".