Cited by 180Machine Learning in HealthcareMedical Coding and Health InformationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Interpretable Representation Learning for Healthcare via Capturing Disease Progression through Time

Open access
Bai, Tian, Zhang, Shanshan, Egleston, Brian L., Vucetic, Slobodan·2018·Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining

Abstract

Various deep learning models have recently been applied to predictive modeling of Electronic Health Records (EHR). In medical claims data, which is a particular type of EHR data, each patient is represented as a sequence of temporally ordered irregularly sampled visits to health providers, where each visit is recorded as an unordered set of medical codes specifying patient's diagnosis and treatment provided during the visit. Based on the observation that different patient conditions have different temporal progression patterns, in this paper we propose a novel interpretable deep learning model, called Timeline. The main novelty of Timeline is that it has a mechanism that learns time decay factors for every medical code. This allows the Timeline to learn that chronic conditions have a longer lasting impact on future visits than acute conditions. Timeline also has an attention mechanism that improves vector embeddings of visits. By analyzing the attention weights and disease progression functions of Timeline, it is possible to interpret the predictions and understand how risks of future visits change over time. We evaluated Timeline on two large-scale real world data sets. The specific task was to predict what is the primary diagnosis category for the next hospital visit given previous visits. Our results show that Timeline has higher accuracy than the state of the art deep learning models based on RNN. In addition, we demonstrate that time decay factors and attentions learned by Timeline are in accord with the medical knowledge and that Timeline can provide a useful insight into its predictions.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3219819.3219904

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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 35 · Cited by 180

Authors
Bai, T., Zhang, S., Egleston, B. L., & Vucetic, S.
Affiliations
  • Temple University (US)
  • Fox Chase Cancer Center (US)
  • Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Venue
Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining
Publisher
ACM
Published
2018-07-19
Volume
2018
Pages
43-51
OpenAlex
W2809396336
Cited by
180
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 18
FWCI
7.35
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (R21CA202130)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
interpretable representation learning, electronic health records, health insurance claims data, disease progression, attention mechanism, temporal sequence modeling

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