Determining Distinct Suicide Attempts From Recurrent Electronic Health Record Codes: Classification Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prior suicide attempts are a relatively strong risk factor for future suicide attempts. There is growing interest in using longitudinal electronic health record (EHR) data to derive statistical risk prediction models for future suicide attempts and other suicidal behavior outcomes. However, model performance may be inflated by a largely unrecognized form of "data leakage" during model training: diagnostic codes for suicide attempt outcomes may refer to prior attempts that are also included in the model as predictors. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop an automated rule for determining when documented suicide attempt diagnostic codes identify distinct suicide attempt events. METHODS: From a large health care system's EHR, we randomly sampled suicide attempt codes for 300 patients with at least one pair of suicide attempt codes documented at least one but no more than 90 days apart. Supervised chart reviewers assigned the clinical settings (ie, emergency department [ED] versus non-ED), methods of suicide attempt, and intercode interval (number of days). The probability (or positive predictive value) that the second suicide attempt code in a given pair of codes referred to a distinct suicide attempt event from its preceding suicide attempt code was calculated by clinical setting, method, and intercode interval. RESULTS: Of 1015 code pairs reviewed, 835 (82.3%) were nonindependent (ie, the 2 codes referred to the same suicide attempt event). When the second code in a pair was documented in a clinical setting other than the ED, it represented a distinct suicide attempt 3.3% of the time. The more time elapsed between codes, the more likely the second code in a pair referred to a distinct suicide attempt event from its preceding code. Code pairs in which the second suicide attempt code was assigned in an ED at least 5 days after its preceding suicide attempt code had a positive predictive value of 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: EHR-based suicide risk prediction models that include International Classification of Diseases codes for prior suicide attempts as a predictor may be highly susceptible to bias due to data leakage in model training. We derived a simple rule to distinguish codes that reflect new, independent suicide attempts: suicide attempt codes documented in an ED setting at least 5 days after a preceding suicide attempt code can be confidently treated as new events in EHR-based suicide risk prediction models. This rule has the potential to minimize upward bias in model performance when prior suicide attempts are included as predictors in EHR-based suicide risk prediction models.
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 | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".