MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410796218 · doi:10.1186/s12916-025-04150-7

A highly scalable deep learning language model for common risks prediction among psychiatric inpatients

2025· article· en· W4410796218 on OpenAlexaff
Enzhao Zhu, Jiayi Wang, Guoquan Zhou, Chunbo Li, Fazhan Chen, Kang Ju, Liangliang Chen, Yichao Yin, Yi Chen, Yanping Zhang, Xu Zhang, Xinlin Zhou, Zongyuan Wang, Jianping Qiu, Hui Wang, Weizhong Shi, Feng Wang, Dong Wang, Zhihao Chen, Jiaojiao Hou, Hui Li, Zisheng Ai

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsLakes Environmental (Canada)
FundersTongji UniversityShanghai Hospital Development CenterEast China University of Science and TechnologyRuijin HospitalShanghai Municipal Health Commission
KeywordsMedicineDeep learningPsychiatryMEDLINEArtificial intelligenceMachine learningNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of studies exploring the performance of Transformers-based language models in common risks assessment among psychiatric inpatients. We aim to develop a scalable risk assessment model using multidimensional textualized data and test the stability, robustness, and benefit of this approach. METHODS: In this real-world cohort study, a deep learning language model was developed and validated using first hospitalized cases diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depressive disorder between January 2016 and March 2023 in three hospitals. The algorithm was externally validated on an independent testing cohort comprising 1180 patients. A total of 140 features, including first medical records (FMR), laboratory examinations, medical orders, and psychological scales, were assessed for analysis. The outcomes were short- and long-term impulsivity (STI and LTI), risk of suicide (STSS and LTSS), and need of physical restraint (STPR and LTPR) assessed by qualified nurses or clinicians. Analysis was carried out between August 2024 and June 2024. Models with different architectures and input settings were compared with each other. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to assess the primary performance of models. The clinical utility was determined by the net benefit under Youden's threshold. RESULTS: Of 7451 patients included in this study, 2982 (47.6%) were male, and the median (interquartile range) age was 42 (28-57) years. The overall incidence of outcomes was 635 (8.5%), 728 (10.5%), 659 (8.8%), 803 (10.8%), 588 (7.9%), and 728 (9.8%) for STPR, LTPR, STSS, LTSS, STI, and LTI, respectively. The multitask semi-structured Transformers-based language (SSTL) model showed more promising AUROCs (STPR: 0.915; LTPR: 0.844; STSS: 0.867; LTSS: 0.879; STI: 0.899; LTI: 0.894) in the prediction of these outcomes than single-tasked or multimodal language models and traditional structured data models. Combining FMR with other data from electronic health records led to significant improvements in the performance and clinical utility of SSTL models based on demographic, diagnosis, laboratory tests, treatment, and psychological scales. CONCLUSIONS: The SSTL model shows potential advantages in prognostic evaluation. FMR is a strong predictor for common risks prediction and may benefit other tasks in psychiatry with minimum requirements for data and data processing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC MedicineSame topicHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsFrench-language works237,207