Suppr超能文献

预测分析在 COVID-19 发病前后预测急诊科量的准确性。

The Accuracy of Predictive Analytics in Forecasting Emergency Department Volume Before and After Onset of COVID-19.

机构信息

Brown University, Alpert School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island.

出版信息

West J Emerg Med. 2024 Jan;25(1):61-66. doi: 10.5811/westjem.61059.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Big data and improved analytic techniques, such as triple exponential smoothing (TES), allow for prediction of emergency department (ED) volume. We sought to determine 1) which method of TES was most accurate in predicting pre-coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), during COVID-19, and post-COVID-19 ED volume; 2) how the pandemic would affect TES prediction accuracy; and 3) whether TES would regain its pre-COVID-19 accuracy in the early post-pandemic period.

METHODS

We studied monthly volumes of four EDs with a combined annual census of approximately 250,000 visits in the two years prior to, during the 25-month COVID-19 pandemic, and the 14 months following. We compared the accuracy of four models of TES forecasting by measuring the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), mean square errors (MSE) and mean absolute deviation (MAD), comparing actual to predicted monthly volume.

RESULTS

In the 23 months prior to COVID-19, the overall average MAPE across four forecasting methods was 3.88% ± 1.88% (range 2.41-6.42% across the four ED sites), rising to 15.21% ± 6.67% during the 25-month COVID-19 period (range 9.97-25.18% across the four sites), and falling to 6.45% ± 3.92% in the 14 months after (range 3.86-12.34% across the four sites). The 12-month Holt-Winter method had the greatest accuracy prior to COVID-19 (3.18% ± 1.65%) and during the pandemic (11.31% ± 4.81%), while the 24-month Holt-Winter offered the best performance following the pandemic (5.91% ± 3.82%). The pediatric ED had an average MAPE more than twice that of the average MAPE of the three adult EDs (6.42% ± 1.54% prior to COVID-19, 25.18% ± 9.42% during the pandemic, and 12.34% ± 0.55% after COVID-19). After the onset of the pandemic, there was no immediate improvement in forecasting model accuracy until two years later; however, these still had not returned to baseline accuracy levels.

CONCLUSION

We were able to identify a TES model that was the most accurate. Most of the models saw an approximate four-fold increase in MAPE after onset of the pandemic. In the months following the most severe waves of COVID-19, we saw improvements in the accuracy of forecasting models, but they were not back to pre-COVID-19 accuracies.

摘要

简介

大数据和改进的分析技术,如三重指数平滑法(TES),可用于预测急诊科(ED)的量。我们旨在确定 1)哪种 TES 方法在预测新冠疫情前、疫情期间和疫情后 ED 量方面最准确;2)大流行将如何影响 TES 预测准确性;3)TES 是否会在大流行后早期恢复其新冠疫情前的准确性。

方法

我们研究了四家 ED 的每月量,这四家 ED 在新冠疫情前的两年和疫情期间的 25 个月以及疫情后的 14 个月中,每年的总就诊量约为 25 万次。我们通过测量平均绝对百分比误差(MAPE)、均方误差(MSE)和平均绝对偏差(MAD)来比较四种 TES 预测模型的准确性,将实际月度量与预测月度量进行比较。

结果

在新冠疫情前的 23 个月中,四种预测方法的总体平均 MAPE 为 3.88%±1.88%(四个 ED 站点的范围为 2.41%-6.42%),在 25 个月的新冠疫情期间上升至 15.21%±6.67%(四个站点的范围为 9.97%-25.18%),在疫情后的 14 个月下降至 6.45%±3.92%(四个站点的范围为 3.86%-12.34%)。12 个月的 Holt-Winter 方法在新冠疫情前(3.18%±1.65%)和疫情期间(11.31%±4.81%)具有最高的准确性,而 24 个月的 Holt-Winter 在疫情后表现最佳(5.91%±3.82%)。儿科 ED 的平均 MAPE 高于三个成人 ED 的平均 MAPE 两倍以上(新冠疫情前为 6.42%±1.54%,疫情期间为 25.18%±9.42%,疫情后为 12.34%±0.55%)。大流行开始后,预测模型的准确性并没有立即提高,直到两年后才有所改善;然而,这些仍未恢复到基线准确性水平。

结论

我们能够确定最准确的 TES 模型。大多数模型在大流行开始后 MAPE 大约增加了四倍。在新冠疫情最严重的几个月之后,我们看到了预测模型准确性的提高,但仍未恢复到新冠疫情前的准确性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8352/10777175/3ea4aa42cb63/wjem-25-61-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验