MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416867988 · doi:10.1186/s12911-025-03269-0

Predicting child and adolescent mental health emergency department revisits: a machine-learning approach compared to a clinician-derived baseline

2025· article· en· W4416867988 on OpenAlexaff
Navjot Kaur Bians, Joonsoo Sean Lyeo, Christina Honeywell, Paula Cloutier, Allison Kennedy, Kathleen Pajer

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsAgricultural Research Institute of OntarioUniversity of OttawaMcMaster UniversityOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental HealthChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityEmergency departmentHealth informaticsMental healthClinical prediction ruleOddsLogistic regressionBaseline (sea)Electronic health record

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Predicting child and youth mental health (CYMH) emergency department (ED) revisits (RVs) is critical for improving patient outcomes and optimizing use of resources. Previous CYMH ED RV studies have used statistical methods with research cohorts and produced varying results. Our aims were to develop a predictive algorithm incorporating machine learning (ML) with electronic health records (EHR) and validate it against a clinician-driven algorithm in a proof of concept project. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from a tertiary care pediatric hospital’s EHR from November 2017–November 2023, yielding 12,700 ED encounters from 8,696 patients, 8–18 years of age. The feature set comprised patient demographics, visit-level variables, laboratory results, procedure codes, and medication records. A mapping of 230 International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes into 28 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-5 categories was performed and a logistic regression (LR) ML model developed. Both tasks used clinical expert input. Seven clinical experts then independently assigned weights to 191 variables using a custom-designed application to create a structured clinician-weighted baseline for comparison to the ML algorithm. Both models were evaluated using AUROC and F1 score as primary metrics with precision and recall as secondary. LR coefficients and odds ratios were the primary interpretability outputs, while SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were used for supplementary visualization across four age strata. RESULTS: The LR machine learning model achieved an AUROC of 0.78, outperforming the structured clinician-weighted baseline (AUROC range: 0.54–0.64) Detailed analysis revealed that predictors such as past ED RV count, psychotherapeutic medication history, substance use history, and prior outpatient MH visits were consistently influential. CONCLUSIONS: This proof of concept project demonstrates that ML can provide complementary, clinically interpretable predictions of CYMH ED RV. Alignment between model-derived predictors and clinician-weighted features supports interpretability and lays a foundation for further development. Future steps include enhancing sensitivity, expanding feature sets, and conducting prospective silent-mode validation to refine performance. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 venueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision MakingSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207