MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7154167045 · doi:10.2196/preprints.83244

Responsible AI for Predicting Delayed Hospital Discharge Among Older Adults: Development and Evaluation Study for Balancing Accuracy, Equity, and Explainability (Preprint)

2025· article· W7154167045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Somayeh Ghazalbash, Manaf Zargoush, Sara J. T. Guilcher, Kerry Kuluski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionReceiver operating characteristicPsychological interventionCluster analysisBoosting (machine learning)Predictive analyticsHealth careGradient boostingCeteris paribus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Amid growing demands and constrained health care resources, effective hospital bed capacity management is crucial. Delayed hospital discharge, where patients remain in the hospital beyond the need for acute care, strains resources, affects patient outcomes, and reduces system efficiency. Predicting such delays facilitates early interventions to avert them and alleviate burdens on patients, care partners, hospitals, and the broader health care system. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study aimed to develop comprehensive predictive analytics for delayed discharges among older adults using explainable machine learning to boost transparency and interpretability, while integrating fairness to mitigate algorithmic biases. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> Leveraging longitudinal data from over 2 decades in Ontario, Canada, we applied extreme gradient boosting and logistic regression models to predict delayed discharges within 90 days post–acute care. Data preprocessing included a 2-year look-back for clinical histories and balanced sampling to address class imbalance. Model performance was assessed via area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration, and clinical utility. Fairness was evaluated across sex, urban or rural residence, and residential instability using several threshold-free metrics. Explainability was examined at the global model level (via partial dependence plots and permutation feature importance) and locally (via Shapley Additive Explanations, breakdown, and ceteris paribus methods), with principal component analysis used to cluster key features for high-risk patients. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> The extreme gradient boosting model outperformed logistic regression, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 on the test set, with acceptable within-group and cross-group ranking fairness across subgroups. Explainability clustering analyses identified functional and cognitive declines (eg, care support needs, dementia, and mobility issues) and regional disparities as primary drivers of high-risk predictions. Bias mitigation improved calibration parity, especially when stratifying by residential instability, underscoring the trade-offs policymakers must weigh between accuracy, fairness, and explainability. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> This study demonstrates the potential of responsible artificial intelligence in health care, emphasizing the need to balance predictive accuracy, equity, and interpretability. It uncovers systemic gaps and offers actionable insights for enhanced discharge planning, resource optimization, and equitable care delivery. </sec>

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.005
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.350 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207