Cited by 123Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchMachine Learning in HealthcareDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

A study in transfer learning: leveraging data from multiple hospitals to enhance hospital-specific predictions

Open access
Wiens, J., Guttag, J., Horvitz, E.·2014·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

Background Data-driven risk stratification models built using data from a single hospital often have a paucity of training data. However, leveraging data from other hospitals can be challenging owing to institutional differences with patients and with data coding and capture. Objective To investigate three approaches to learning hospital-specific predictions about the risk of hospital-associated infection with Clostridium difficile, and perform a comparative analysis of the value of different ways of using external data to enhance hospital-specific predictions. Materials and methods We evaluated each approach on 132 853 admissions from three hospitals, varying in size and location. The first approach was a single-task approach, in which only training data from the target hospital (ie, the hospital for which the model was intended) were used. The second used only data from the other two hospitals. The third approach jointly incorporated data from all hospitals while seeking a solution in the target space. Results The relative performance of the three different approaches was found to be sensitive to the hospital selected as the target. However, incorporating data from all hospitals consistently had the highest performance. Discussion The results characterize the challenges and opportunities that come with (1) using data or models from collections of hospitals without adapting them to the site at which the model will be used, and (2) using only local data to build models for sm…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002162

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wiens, J., Guttag, J., & Horvitz, E.
Affiliations
  • MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
  • Microsoft (United States) (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2014-07-01
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
699-706
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2132755184
Cited by
123
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4
FWCI
5.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Microsoft Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
transfer learning, Clostridium difficile infection, nosocomial infections, risk stratification, external data, small hospitals, rare events
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, Clostridium Infections, Cross Infection, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Middle Aged, United States, Models, Statistical, Logistic Models, Clostridioides difficile, Risk Assessment, Young Adult

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