MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229455170 · doi:10.2196/38241

Predicting Postoperative Mortality With Deep Neural Networks and Natural Language Processing: Model Development and Validation

2022· article· en· W4229455170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pei‐Fu Chen, Li‐Chin Chen, Yow-Kuan Lin, Guo-Hung Li, Feipei Lai, Cheng-Wei Lü, Chi-Yu Yang, Kuan‐Chih Chen, Tzu‐Yu Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFar Eastern Memorial HospitalMinistry of Science and Technology, Taiwan
KeywordsReceiver operating characteristicUnstructured dataMedicineArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingDeep learningText miningRecallComputer scienceMachine learningData miningBig dataPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) achieves better predictions of postoperative mortality than previous prediction tools. Free-text descriptions of the preoperative diagnosis and the planned procedure are available preoperatively. Because reading these descriptions helps anesthesiologists evaluate the risk of the surgery, we hypothesized that deep learning (DL) models with unstructured text could improve postoperative mortality prediction. However, it is challenging to extract meaningful concept embeddings from this unstructured clinical text. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a fusion DL model containing structured and unstructured features to predict the in-hospital 30-day postoperative mortality before surgery. ML models for predicting postoperative mortality using preoperative data with or without free clinical text were assessed. METHODS: We retrospectively collected preoperative anesthesia assessments, surgical information, and discharge summaries of patients undergoing general and neuraxial anesthesia from electronic health records (EHRs) from 2016 to 2020. We first compared the deep neural network (DNN) with other models using the same input features to demonstrate effectiveness. Then, we combined the DNN model with bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) to extract information from clinical texts. The effects of adding text information on the model performance were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Statistical significance was evaluated using P<.05. RESULTS: The final cohort contained 121,313 patients who underwent surgeries. A total of 1562 (1.29%) patients died within 30 days of surgery. Our BERT-DNN model achieved the highest AUROC (0.964, 95% CI 0.961-0.967) and AUPRC (0.336, 95% CI 0.276-0.402). The AUROC of the BERT-DNN was significantly higher compared to logistic regression (AUROC=0.952, 95% CI 0.949-0.955) and the American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status (ASAPS AUROC=0.892, 95% CI 0.887-0.896) but not significantly higher compared to the DNN (AUROC=0.959, 95% CI 0.956-0.962) and the random forest (AUROC=0.961, 95% CI 0.958-0.964). The AUPRC of the BERT-DNN was significantly higher compared to the DNN (AUPRC=0.319, 95% CI 0.260-0.384), the random forest (AUPRC=0.296, 95% CI 0.239-0.360), logistic regression (AUPRC=0.276, 95% CI 0.220-0.339), and the ASAPS (AUPRC=0.149, 95% CI 0.107-0.203). CONCLUSIONS: Our BERT-DNN model has an AUPRC significantly higher compared to previously proposed models using no text and an AUROC significantly higher compared to logistic regression and the ASAPS. This technique helps identify patients with higher risk from the surgical description text in EHRs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207