Predicting Acute Kidney Injury: A Machine Learning Approach Using Electronic Health Records
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in hospitalized patients and can result in increased hospital stay, health-related costs, mortality and morbidity. A number of recent studies have shown that AKI is predictable and avoidable if early risk factors can be identified by analyzing Electronic Health Records (EHRs). In this study, we employ machine learning techniques to identify older patients who have a risk of readmission with AKI to the hospital or emergency department within 90 days after discharge. One million patients’ records are included in this study who visited the hospital or emergency department in Ontario between 2014 and 2016. The predictor variables include patient demographics, comorbid conditions, medications and diagnosis codes. We developed 31 prediction models based on different combinations of two sampling techniques, three ensemble methods, and eight classifiers. These models were evaluated through 10-fold cross-validation and compared based on the AUROC metric. The performances of these models were consistent, and the AUROC ranged between 0.61 and 0.88 for predicting AKI among 31 prediction models. In general, the performances of ensemble-based methods were higher than the cost-sensitive logistic regression. We also validated features that are most relevant in predicting AKI with a healthcare expert to improve the performance and reliability of the models. This study predicts the risk of AKI for a patient after being discharged, which provides healthcare providers enough time to intervene before the onset of AKI.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".