Development and prospective evaluation of a machine learning model to predict vomiting among pediatric cancer and hematopoietic cell transplant patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Objectives were to develop a machine learning (ML) model based on electronic health record (EHR) data to predict the risk of vomiting within a 96-hour window after admission to the pediatric oncology and hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) services using retrospective data and to evaluate the model prospectively in a silent trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Admissions between 2018-06-02 to 2024-02-17 (retrospective) and 2024-05-09 to 2024-08-05 (prospective) to the oncology or HCT services were included. Data source was SEDAR, a curated and validated approach to deliver EHR data for ML. Prediction time was 08:30 the morning following admission. The outcome was any vomiting within 96 h following prediction time. We trained models using L2-regularized logistic regression, LightGBM and XGBoost. Training cohorts include the target cohort and all inpatient admissions. RESULTS: There were 7,408 admissions in the retrospective phase and 340 admissions in the prospective silent trial phase. The best-performing model in the retrospective phase was the LightGBM model trained on all inpatients. The number of features in the final model was 2,859. The area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.730 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.694-0.765) for the retrospective phase and 0.716 (95% CI 0.649-0.784) for the prospective silent trial phase. CONCLUSIONS: We found that data in the EHR could be used to develop a retrospective ML model to predict vomiting among pediatric oncology and HCT inpatients. This model retained satisfactory performance in a prospective silent trial. Future plans will include deployment into clinical workflows and determining if the model improves vomiting control.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".