MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4364858013 · doi:10.2196/43017

Predictive Modeling of Lapses in Care for People Living with HIV in Chicago: Algorithm Development and Interpretation

2023· article· en· W4364858013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joseph A. Mason, Eleanor E. Friedman, Samantha A. Devlin, John A. Schneider, Jessica P. Ridgway

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Computer scienceAlgorithmGerontologyMedicinePsychologyEnvironmental healthFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Reducing care lapses for people living with HIV is critical to ending the HIV epidemic and beneficial for their health. Predictive modeling can identify clinical factors associated with HIV care lapses. Previous studies have identified these factors within a single clinic or using a national network of clinics, but public health strategies to improve retention in care in the United States often occur within a regional jurisdiction (eg, a city or county). OBJECTIVE: We sought to build predictive models of HIV care lapses using a large, multisite, noncurated database of electronic health records (EHRs) in Chicago, Illinois. METHODS: We used 2011-2019 data from the Chicago Area Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Network (CAPriCORN), a database including multiple health systems, covering the majority of 23,580 people with an HIV diagnosis living in Chicago. CAPriCORN uses a hash-based data deduplication method to follow people across multiple Chicago health care systems with different EHRs, providing a unique citywide view of retention in HIV care. From the database, we used diagnosis codes, medications, laboratory tests, demographics, and encounter information to build predictive models. Our primary outcome was lapses in HIV care, defined as having more than 12 months between subsequent HIV care encounters. We built logistic regression, random forest, elastic net logistic regression, and XGBoost models using all variables and compared their performance to a baseline logistic regression model containing only demographics and retention history. RESULTS: We included people living with HIV with at least 2 HIV care encounters in the database, yielding 16,930 people living with HIV with 191,492 encounters. All models outperformed the baseline logistic regression model, with the most improvement from the XGBoost model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.776, 95% CI 0.768-0.784 vs 0.674, 95% CI 0.664-0.683; P<.001). Top predictors included the history of care lapses, being seen by an infectious disease provider (vs a primary care provider), site of care, Hispanic ethnicity, and previous HIV laboratory testing. The random forest model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.751, 95% CI 0.742-0.759) revealed age, insurance type, and chronic comorbidities (eg, hypertension), as important variables in predicting a care lapse. CONCLUSIONS: We used a real-world approach to leverage the full scope of data available in modern EHRs to predict HIV care lapses. Our findings reinforce previously known factors, such as the history of prior care lapses, while also showing the importance of laboratory testing, chronic comorbidities, sociodemographic characteristics, and clinic-specific factors for predicting care lapses for people living with HIV in Chicago. We provide a framework for others to use data from multiple different health care systems within a single city to examine lapses in care using EHR data, which will aid in jurisdictional efforts to improve retention in HIV care.

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)0.015
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→