MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414841044 · doi:10.2196/73020

Predicting 30-Days Hospital Readmission for Patients with Heart Failure Using Electronic Health Record Embeddings: Comparative Evaluation

2025· article· en· W4414841044 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Prabin Shakya, Ayush Khaneja, Kavishwar B. Wagholikar

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsElectronic health recordHeart failureHospital readmissionHealth recordsElectronic recordsWord2vecFeature (linguistics)Risk stratificationClinical decision support system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a public health concern with a wider impact on quality of life and cost of care. One of the major challenges in HF is the higher rate of unplanned readmissions and suboptimal performance of models to predict the readmissions. Hence, in this study, we implemented embeddings-based approaches to generate features for improving model performance. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of different feature embedding approaches for improving the prediction of unplanned readmissions in patients with heart failure. Methods: We compared three embedding approaches including word2vec on terminology codes and concept unique identifier (CUIs) and BERT on descriptive text of concept with baseline (one hot-encoding). We compared area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and F1-scores for the logistic regression, eXtream gradient-boosting (XGBoost) and artificial neural network (ANN) models using these embedding approaches. The model was tested on the heart failure cohort (N=21,031) identified using least restrictive phenotyping methods from MIMIC-IV dataset. Results: We found that the embedding approaches significantly improved the performance of the prediction models. The XGBoost performed better for all approaches. The word2vec embeddings (0.65) trained on the dataset outperformed embeddings from pre-trained BERT model (0.59) using descriptive text. Conclusions: Embedding methods, particularly word2vec trained on electronic health record data, can better discriminate HF readmission cases compared to both one-hot encoding and pre-trained BERT embeddings on concept descriptions making it a viable approach of automation feature selection. The observed AUROC improvement (0.65 vs 0.54) may support more effective risk stratification and targeted clinical interventions.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207