Forecasting Hospital Room and Ward Occupancy Using Static and Dynamic Information Concurrently: Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Predicting the bed occupancy rate (BOR) is essential for efficient hospital resource management, long-term budget planning, and patient care planning. Although macro-level BOR prediction for the entire hospital is crucial, predicting occupancy at a detailed level, such as specific wards and rooms, is more practical and useful for hospital scheduling. Objective The aim of this study was to develop a web-based support tool that allows hospital administrators to grasp the BOR for each ward and room according to different time periods. Methods We trained time-series models based on long short-term memory (LSTM) using individual bed data aggregated hourly each day to predict the BOR for each ward and room in the hospital. Ward training involved 2 models with 7- and 30-day time windows, and room training involved models with 3- and 7-day time windows for shorter-term planning. To further improve prediction performance, we added 2 models trained by concatenating dynamic data with static data representing room-specific details. Results We confirmed the results of a total of 12 models using bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) and LSTM, and the model based on Bi-LSTM showed better performance. The ward-level prediction model had a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.067, mean square error (MSE) of 0.009, root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.094, and R2 score of 0.544. Among the room-level prediction models, the model that combined static data exhibited superior performance, with a MAE of 0.129, MSE of 0.050, RMSE of 0.227, and R2 score of 0.600. Model results can be displayed on an electronic dashboard for easy access via the web. Conclusions We have proposed predictive BOR models for individual wards and rooms that demonstrate high performance. The results can be visualized through a web-based dashboard, aiding hospital administrators in bed operation planning. This contributes to resource optimization and the reduction of hospital resource use.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".