Predicting Unplanned Readmission Risk in Patients With Cirrhosis: Complication-Aware Dynamic Classifier Selection Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cirrhosis is a leading cause of noncancer deaths in gastrointestinal diseases, resulting in high hospitalization and readmission rates. Early identification of high-risk patients is vital for proactive interventions and improving health care outcomes. However, the quality and integrity of real-world electronic health records (EHRs) limit their utility in developing risk assessment tools. Objective: Despite the widespread application of classical and ensemble machine learning for EHR-based predictive tasks, the diversity of health conditions among patients and the inherent limitations of the data, such as incompleteness, sparsity, and temporal dynamics, have not been fully addressed. To tackle those challenges, we explored a framework that characterizes patient subgroups and adaptively selects optimal predictive models for each patient on the fly to enable individualized decision support. Methods: The proposed framework uniquely addresses patient heterogeneity by aligning diverse subgroups with dynamically selected classifiers. First, patient subgroups are generated and characterized using rules indicating medical diagnosis patterns. Next, a meta-learning framework trains a meta-classifier for optimal dynamic model selection, which identifies suitable models for individual patients. Notably, we incorporated a tailored region of competence to refine model selection, specifically accounting for cirrhosis complications. This approach not only enhances predictive performance but also elucidates why individualized predictions are better supported by selected classifiers trained on specific data subsets. Results: The proposed framework was evaluated for predicting 14-day and 30-day readmission in patients with cirrhosis using multicenter data obtained from 6 hospitals. The final dataset comprised 3307 patients with at least 2 admission records, along with a range of factors including demographic information, complications, and laboratory test results. The proposed framework achieved an average AUC (area under the curve) improvement of 5% and 4% compared to the best baseline models, respectively. Conclusions: By leveraging the expertise of the most competent classifiers for each patient subgroup, our approach enables interpretable training and dynamic selection of heterogeneous predictive models. This advancement not only improves prediction accuracy but also highlights its considerable potential for clinical applications, facilitating the alignment of diverse patient subgroups with tailored decision-support algorithms.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".