MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387101253 · doi:10.2196/46364

Determining Distinct Suicide Attempts From Recurrent Electronic Health Record Codes: Classification Study

2023· article· en· W4387101253 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kate H. Bentley, Emily Madsen, Eugene Song, Yu Zhou, Víctor M. Castro, Hyunjoon Lee, Young A Lee, Jordan W. Smoller

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthLeon Levy FoundationTommy Fuss Fund
KeywordsPreprintElectronic health recordHealth recordsMedicinePsychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207