MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408156877 · doi:10.1007/s13755-024-00332-4

Leveraging patients’ longitudinal data to improve the Hospital One-year Mortality Risk

2025· article· en· W4408156877 on OpenAlexafffund
Hakima Laribi, Nicolas Raymond, Ryeyan Taseen, Dan Poenaru, Martin Vallières

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Information Science and Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCambridge Memorial HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLongitudinal dataLongitudinal studyMedicineDemographyGeographyEmergency medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate prediction of medium-term survival after admission is necessary for identifying end-of-life patients who may benefit from earlier goals of care (GOC) discussions. While previous studies have leveraged admission data from electronic health records (EHRs) to predict the hospital one-year mortality risk (HOMR) score, they focused on single admissions, without considering longitudinal patient history and its impact on prognostication. To address this gap, we developed the Ensemble Long Short-Term Memory (ELSTM) neural network, which learns from multiple visits of the same patient to improve the accuracy of the HOMR score. Furthermore, in this work, we generated a synthetic dataset and made it publicly available to encourage further research in this area while safeguarding patient privacy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueHealth Information Science and Systems→Same topicMachine Learning in Healthcare→French-language works237,207→