Stratification of Length of Stay Prediction following Surgical Cytoreduction in Advanced High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Patients Using Artificial Intelligence; the Leeds L-AI-OS Score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: Length of stay (LOS) has been suggested as a marker of the effectiveness of short-term care. Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies could help monitor hospital stays. We developed an AI-based novel predictive LOS score for advanced-stage high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) patients following cytoreductive surgery and refined factors significantly affecting LOS. (2) Methods: Machine learning and deep learning methods using artificial neural networks (ANN) were used together with conventional logistic regression to predict continuous and binary LOS outcomes for HGSOC patients. The models were evaluated in a post-hoc internal validation set and a Graphical User Interface (GUI) was developed to demonstrate the clinical feasibility of sophisticated LOS predictions. (3) Results: For binary LOS predictions at differential time points, the accuracy ranged between 70-98%. Feature selection identified surgical complexity, pre-surgery albumin, blood loss, operative time, bowel resection with stoma formation, and severe postoperative complications (CD3-5) as independent LOS predictors. For the GUI numerical LOS score, the ANN model was a good estimator for the standard deviation of the LOS distribution by ± two days. (4) Conclusions: We demonstrated the development and application of both quantitative and qualitative AI models to predict LOS in advanced-stage EOC patients following their cytoreduction. Accurate identification of potentially modifiable factors delaying hospital discharge can further inform services performing root cause analysis of LOS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".