Exploring the Preprocessing of a Time-Series Healthcare Administrative Dataset on Deep Learning to Improve Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preprocessing methods are important in enhancing prediction performance for time-series administrative data. This study underscores the importance of preprocessing methods by comparing two data representation techniques, that can be used with sliding window techniques for time-series administrative healthcare data, for use with gated recurrent unit (GRU) networks. The first method uses a sequence event representation and the second employs a sequence matrix representation. The evaluation was conducted through a retrospective administrative healthcare data case study to predict multiple outcomes. The target outcomes were cases where a person’s First Healthcare Encounter indicated they were experiencing Homelessness (FHE-H) or involved Police (FHE-P), as recorded in the healthcare data. Results reveal that the GRU combined with sequence matrix representation and sliding window outperformed the sequence of events with the sliding window by over 20% in the area under the curve (AUC) and sensitivity for both outcomes. Given the data used in this analysis, sequence matrix representation was superior to sequence event representation while using GRU models. The results remained consistent across the evaluation in real-world clinical frameworks using two trigger methods for prediction time, such as the sliding window and clinical demand window structures.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".