Incorporating temporal EHR data in predictive models for risk stratification of renal function deterioration
Open accessAbstract
Predictive models built using temporal data in electronic health records (EHRs) can potentially play a major role in improving management of chronic diseases. However, these data present a multitude of technical challenges, including irregular sampling of data and varying length of available patient history. In this paper, we describe and evaluate three different approaches that use machine learning to build predictive models using temporal EHR data of a patient. The first approach is a commonly used non-temporal approach that aggregates values of the predictors in the patient's medical history. The other two approaches exploit the temporal dynamics of the data. The two temporal approaches vary in how they model temporal information and handle missing data. Using data from the EHR of Mount Sinai Medical Center, we learned and evaluated the models in the context of predicting loss of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), the most common assessment of kidney function. Our results show that incorporating temporal information in patient's medical history can lead to better prediction of loss of kidney function. They also demonstrate that exactly how this information is incorporated is important. In particular, our results demonstrate that the relative importance of different predictors varies over time, and that using multi-task learning to account for this is an appropriate way to robustly capture the temporal dynamics in EHR data. Using a case study, we also demonstrate how the multi-task learning based model can yield predictive models with better performance for identifying patients at high risk of short-term loss of kidney function.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
EHR data are sequentially ordered in time, and this sequential order is important.
“EHR data are sequentially ordered in time, and this sequential order is important.12”
From Foresight-a generative pretrained transformer for modelling of patient timelines using electronic health records: a retrospective modelling study (2024) · cites this paper as [12]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 22 · Cited by 136
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [1]Levey AS Stevens LA Coresh J Conceptual model of CKD: applications and implications Am J Kidney Dis 2009 53 Suppl 3 S4 S16 http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.07.048 19231760 · DOI
- [3]Sud M CKD stage at nephrology referral and factors influencing the risks of ESRD and death Am J Kidney Dis 2014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.12.008. pii: S0272-6386(13)01637-5 24485146 · DOI
- [4]Chou C-C Adults with late stage 3 chronic kidney disease are at high risk for prevalent silent brain infarction: a population-based study Stroke; J Cerebral Circulat 2011 42 8 2120 5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.597930 21700935 · DOI
- [5]Tangri N A predictive model for progression of chronic kidney disease to kidney failure JAMA 2011 305 15 1553 9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.451 21482743 · DOI
- [6]Desai AS Association between cardiac biomarkers and the development of ESRD in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, Anemia, and CKD Am J Kidney Dis 2011 58 5 717 28 http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2011.05.020 21820220 · DOI
- [7]Landray MJ Prediction of ESRD and death among people with CKD: the Chronic Renal Impairment in Birmingham (CRIB) prospective cohort study Am J Kidney Dis 2010 56 6 1082 94 http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2010.07.016 21035932 PMC2991589 · DOI
- [8]Echouffo-Tcheugui JB Kengne AP Risk models to predict chronic kidney disease and its progression: a systematic review PLoS Med 2012 9 11 e1001344 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001344 23185136 PMC3502517 · DOI
- [9]Hallan SI Combining GFR and albuminuria to classify CKD improves prediction of ESRD J Am Soc Nephrol 2009 20 5 1069 77 http://dx.doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2008070730 19357254 PMC2678033 · DOI
- [10]Hauskrecht MaL Zitao Wu Lei Modeling clinical time series using Gaussian process sequences SIAM international conference on data mining 2013 623 31
- [11]Luo L Methods for estimating kidney disease stage transition probabilities using electronic medical records eGEMs (Generating Evidence & Methods to improve patient outcomes) 2013 1 3 http://dx.doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.104 PMC4371506 25848580 · DOI
- [12]Toma T Abu-Hanna A Bosman R Discovery and inclusion of SOFA score episode in mortality prediction J Biomed Inform 2007 40 649 60 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2007.03.007 17485242 · DOI
- [13]Tudor Toma R-JB Siebes Arno Peek Niels Abu-Hanna Ameen Learning predictive models that use pattern discovery – a bootstrap evaluative approach applied in organ functioning sequences J Biomed Inform 2010 43 578 86 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2010.03.00 20332034 · DOI
- [14]Levey AS Coresh J Chronic kidney disease The Lancet 2012 379 9811 165 80 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60178-5 21840587 · DOI · Paper page
- [17]Kissmeyer L Community nephrology: audit of screening for renal insufficiency in a high risk population Nephrol Dial Transplant 1999 14 9 2150 5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/14.9.2150 10489224 · DOI
- [19]Ginès P Schrier RW Renal failure in cirrhosis N Engl J Med 2009 361 13 1279 90 http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra0809139 19776409 · DOI
- [20]Stengel B Chronic kidney disease and cancer: a troubling connection J Nephrol 2010 23 3 253 62 20349418 PMC4823382
- Authors
- Singh, A., Nadkarni, G., Gottesman, O., Ellis, S. B., Bottinger, E. P., & Guttag, J. V.
- Affiliations
- MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- Corresponding author
- Singh, Anima
- Venue
- Journal of Biomedical Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-02
- Volume
- 53
- Pages
- 220-228
- ISSN
- 1532-0464 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4520404
- OpenAlex
- W2015462679
- Cited by
- 136
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 6.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Biomedical Informatics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PMC
- Funders
- Andrea and Charles Bronfman Philantropies
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Keywords
- risk stratification, renal function decline, estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, multi-task learning, missing data handling, irregularly sampled data, chronic kidney disease, risk prediction model
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Algorithms, Glomerular Filtration Rate, Hospitals, Humans, Kidney, Kidney Diseases, Medical Informatics, New York City, Risk, Software, Time Factors, Models, Statistical, Disease Progression, Area Under Curve, Electronic Health Records
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review