Enhancing risk prediction base on health administrative data using high-dimensional prediction model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Health administrative datasets often do not contain important clinical variables for predicting the risk of medical outcomes. However, they often contain a wide range of health-care variables that can be used to develop a high-dimensional prediction model (hdPM) that compensates for the lack of clinical predictors. We aimed to compare the predictive performance of an hdPM with a conventional model that relies only on investigator-specified clinical predictors. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Using data on 2923 individuals diagnosed with tuberculosis (TB), a Cox proportional hazards model was used to simulate a time-to-event outcome using plasmode simulation. We considered two scenarios: whether strong or weak predictors were unavailable in the development sample. Conventional and hdPMs were fitted without and with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) shrinkage and were compared in terms of internally validated time-dependent c-statistic and calibration. RESULTS: The hdPMs had a better time-dependent c-statistic in predicting TB mortality and also outperformed the conventional model in terms of time-dependent c-statistic in our simulations. Compared to a c-statistic of 0.78 for the conventional model with a strong unobserved predictor, LASSO-based hdPMs had a c-statistic of 0.90. While non-penalized hdPMs exhibited overfitting, LASSO-based hdPMs demonstrated superior cross-validated discrimination and calibration. Results were consistent in sensitivity analyses with varying numbers of additional health-care variables and different outcome types. CONCLUSION: Health administrative data can compensate for the lack of known and important clinical variables with many health-care variables from the linked databases, especially in hdPMs with LASSO-regularization, substantially enhance predictive accuracy and offer a robust approach for risk stratification and assessment in epidemiological research. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Researchers develop prediction models with only clinical variables. But health administrative data often do not contain some clinical variables. For example, smoking, weight, height, physical activity, and diet data are unavailable. They do have codes such as International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 diagnostic codes. We transformed these codes into binary and count variables. We created models to predict tuberculosis mortality. The models were not very accurate when using only clinical variables. Accuracy improved when we added the codes. We can use this kind of model in policy and research. For example, we can identify people at high mortality risk. We can then design interventions for the high-risk group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".