MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121947602 · doi:10.2196/23454

Assessing the International Transferability of a Machine Learning Model for Detecting Medication Error in the General Internal Medicine Clinic: Multicenter Preliminary Validation Study

2021· article· en· W3121947602 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yen Po Chin, Wenyu Song, Chia-En Lien, Chang Ho Yoon, Wei-Chen Wang, Jennifer Liu, Phung‐Anh Nguyen, Yi-Ting Feng, Li Zhou, Yu‐Chuan Li, David W. Bates

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, India
KeywordsTransferabilityMulticenter studyComputer scienceMedicineMedical physicsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningSurgeryRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although most current medication error prevention systems are rule-based, these systems may result in alert fatigue because of poor accuracy. Previously, we had developed a machine learning (ML) model based on Taiwan's local databases (TLD) to address this issue. However, the international transferability of this model is unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the international transferability of a machine learning model for detecting medication errors and whether the federated learning approach could further improve the accuracy of the model. METHODS: The study cohort included 667,572 outpatient prescriptions from 2 large US academic medical centers. Our ML model was applied to build the original model (O model), the local model (L model), and the hybrid model (H model). The O model was built using the data of 1.34 billion outpatient prescriptions from TLD. A validation set with 8.98% (60,000/667,572) of the prescriptions was first randomly sampled, and the remaining 91.02% (607,572/667,572) of the prescriptions served as the local training set for the L model. With a federated learning approach, the H model used the association values with a higher frequency of co-occurrence among the O and L models. A testing set with 600 prescriptions was classified as substantiated and unsubstantiated by 2 independent physician reviewers and was then used to assess model performance. RESULTS: The interrater agreement was significant in terms of classifying prescriptions as substantiated and unsubstantiated (κ=0.91; 95% CI 0.88 to 0.95). With thresholds ranging from 0.5 to 1.5, the alert accuracy ranged from 75%-78% for the O model, 76%-78% for the L model, and 79%-85% for the H model. CONCLUSIONS: Our ML model has good international transferability among US hospital data. Using the federated learning approach with local hospital data could further improve the accuracy of the model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207