A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Prediction of patient disposition: comparison of computer and human approaches and a proposed synthesis. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: To compare the accuracy of computer versus physician predictions of hospitalization and to explore the potential synergies of hybrid physician-computer models.

Materials And Methods: A single-center prospective observational study in a tertiary pediatric hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, United States. Nine emergency department (ED) attending physicians participated in the study. Physicians predicted the likelihood of admission for patients in the ED whose hospitalization disposition had not yet been decided. In parallel, a random-forest computer model was developed to predict hospitalizations from the ED, based on data available within the first hour of the ED encounter. The model was tested on the same cohort of patients evaluated by the participating physicians.

Results: 198 pediatric patients were considered for inclusion. Six patients were excluded due to incomplete or erroneous physician forms. Of the 192 included patients, 54 (28%) were admitted and 138 (72%) were discharged. The positive predictive value for the prediction of admission was 66% for the clinicians, 73% for the computer model, and 86% for a hybrid model combining the two. To predict admission, physicians relied more heavily on the clinical appearance of the patient, while the computer model relied more heavily on technical data-driven features, such as the rate of prior admissions or distance traveled to hospital.

Discussion: Computer-generated predictions of patient disposition were more accurate than clinician-generated predictions. A hybrid prediction model improved accuracy over both individual predictions, highlighting the complementary and synergistic effects of both approaches.

Conclusion: The integration of computer and clinician predictions can yield improved predictive performance.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8324238PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab076DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

computer model
12
patient disposition
8
relied heavily
8
computer
6
model
6
predictions
5
patients
5
prediction patient
4
disposition comparison
4
comparison computer
4

Similar Publications