Abstract
Objective: Implementing machine learning models to identify clinical deterioration on the wards is associated with improved outcomes. However, these models have high false positive rates and only use structured data. Therefore, we aim to compare models with and without information from clinical notes for predicting deterioration. Materials and Methods: Adults admitted to the wards at the University of Chicago (development cohort) and University of Wisconsin-Madison (external validation cohort) were included. Predictors consisted of structured and unstructured variables extracted from notes as Concept Unique Identifiers (CUIs). We parameterized CUIs in five ways: Standard Tokenization (ST), ICD Rollup using Tokenization (ICDR-T), ICD Rollup using Binary Variables (ICDR-BV), CUIs as SapBERT Embeddings (SE), and CUI Clustering using SapBERT embeddings (CC). Each parameterization method combined with structured data and structured data-only were compared for predicting intensive care unit transfer or death in the next 24 hours using deep recurrent neural networks. Results: The study included 506,076 ward patients, 4.9% of whom experienced the outcome. The SE model achieved the highest AUPRC (0.208), followed by CC (0.199) and the structured-only model (0.199), ICDR-BV (0.194), ICDR-T (0.166), and ST (0.158). The CC and structured-only models achieved the highest AUROC (0.870), followed by ICDR-T (0.867), ICDR-BV (0.866), ST (0.860), and SE (0.859). Discussion: A multimodal model combining structured data with embeddings using SapBERT had the highest AUPRC, but performance was similar between models with and without CUIs. Conclusion: The addition of CUIs from notes to structured data did not meaningfully improve model performance for predicting clinical deterioration.
Full Text Availability
The license terms selected by the author(s) for this preprint version do not permit archiving in PMC. The full text is available from the preprint server.
