The development of early warning scores or alerting systems for the prediction of adverse events in psychiatric patients: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND

Adverse events in psychiatric settings present ongoing challenges for both patients and staff. Despite advances in psychiatric interventions and treatments, research on early warning scores and tools to predict patient deterioration is limited. This review provides a summary of the few tools that have been developed in a psychiatric setting, comparing machine learning (ML) and nonmachine learning/traditional methodologies. The outcomes of interest include the selected key variables that contribute to adverse events and the performance and validation measures of the predictive models.

METHODS

Three databases, Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase, were searched between February 2023 and April 2023 to identify all relevant studies that included a combination of (and were not limited to) the following search terms: "Early warning," "Alerting tool," and "Psychiatry". Peer-reviewed primary research publications were included without imposing any date restrictions. A total of 1,193 studies were screened. A total of 9 studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in this review. The PICOS model, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewer's Manual, and PRISMA guidelines were applied.

RESULTS

This review identified nine studies that developed predictive models for adverse events in psychiatric settings. Encompassing 41,566 participants across studies that used both ML and non-ML algorithmic approaches, performance metrics, primarily AUC ROC, varied among studies between 0.62 and 0.95. The best performing model that had also been validated was the random forest (RF) ML model, with a score of 0.87 and a high sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 88%.

CONCLUSION

Currently, few predictive models have been developed for adverse events and patient deterioration in psychiatric settings. The findings of this review suggest that the use of ML and non-ML algorithms show moderate to good performance in predicting adverse events at the hospitals/units where the tool was developed. Understanding these models and the methodology of the studies is crucial for enhancing patient care as well as staff and patient safety research. Further research on the development and implementation of predictive tools in psychiatry should be carried out to assess the feasibility and efficacy of the tool in psychiatric patients.