Developing a machine learning model to predict patient need for computed tomography imaging in the emergency department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overcrowding is a well-known problem in hospitals and emergency departments (ED) that can negatively impact patients and staff. This study aims to present a machine learning model to detect a patient's need for a Computed Tomography (CT) exam in the emergency department at the earliest possible time. The data for this work was collected from ED at Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre over one year (05/2016-05/2017) and contained administrative triage information. The target outcome was whether or not a patient required a CT exam. Multiple combinations of text embedding methods, machine learning algorithms, and data resampling methods were experimented with to find the optimal model for this task. The final model was trained with 81, 118 visits and tested on a hold-out test set with a size of 9, 013 visits. The best model achieved a ROC AUC score of 0.86 and had a sensitivity of 87.3% and specificity of 70.9%. The most important factors that led to a CT scan order were found to be chief complaint, treatment area, and triage acuity. The proposed model was able to successfully identify patients needing a CT using administrative triage data that is available at the initial stage of a patient's arrival. By determining that a CT scan is needed early in the patient's visit, the ED can allocate resources to ensure these investigations are completed quickly and patient flow is maintained to reduce overcrowding.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".