MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391224457 · doi:10.3233/shti231093

Predicting Urgent Dialysis at Ambulance Transport to the Emergency Department Using Machine Learning Methods

2024· article· en· W4391224457 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sheida Majouni, Karthik Tennankore, Syed Sibte Raza Abidi

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialysisMedical emergencyEmergency departmentHemodialysisEmergency medicineMedicineSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hemodialysis patients frequently require ambulance transport to the hospital for dialysis. Some patients require urgent dialysis (UD) within 24 hours of transport to hospital to avoid morbidity and mortality. UD is not available in all hospitals; therefore, predicting patients who need UD prior to hospital transport can help paramedics with destination planning. In this paper, we developed machine learning models for paramedics to predict whether a patient needs UD based on patient characteristics available at the time of ambulance transport. This paper presented a study based on ambulance data collected in Halifax, Canada. Given that relatively few patients need UD, a class imbalance problem is addressed by up-sampling methods and prediction models are developed using multiple machine learning methods. The achieved prediction scores are F1-score=0.76, sensitivity=0.76, and specificity=0.97, confirming that models can predict UD with limited patient characteristics.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207