Sim Taeyong, Cho Eunyoung, Kim Jihyun, Kim Ho Gwan, Kim Soo-Jeong
AITRICS Corporation, Seoul 06221, Republic of Korea.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Presbyterian Medical Center, Jeonju 54987, Republic of Korea.
J Clin Med. 2025 Jun 23;14(13):4444. doi: 10.3390/jcm14134444.
The quantity of clinical data varies across patient populations and often reflect clinicians' perceptions of risk and their decisions to perform certain laboratory tests. Missingness in electronic health records can be informative because it may indicate that certain clinical parameters were not measured because clinicians considered them unnecessary for stable patients. This retrospective single-center study explored the ability of a deep learning-based early warning system, the VitalCare-Major Adverse Event Score, to predict unplanned intensive care unit transfers, cardiac arrests, or death among adult inpatients 6 h in advance. We classified patients using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and assessed whether patients with high severity and a greater volume of laboratory data benefited from more comprehensive inputs. Overall, patients with high CCI scores underwent more testing and had fewer missing values, whereas those with moderate-to-low CCI scores underwent less testing and had more missing data. Within the event cohorts, however, the high-CCI and moderate/low-CCI groups showed similar proportions and patterns of missing values. The discriminative ability of the model remained robust across both groups, implying that the clinical context of missingness outweighed the raw quantity of available data. These findings support a nuanced view of data completeness and highlight that preserving the real-world patterns of ordering laboratory tests may enhance predictive performance.
临床数据的数量因患者群体而异,并且常常反映临床医生对风险的认知以及他们进行某些实验室检查的决策。电子健康记录中的数据缺失可能具有参考价值,因为这可能表明某些临床参数未被测量,原因是临床医生认为对于病情稳定的患者而言这些参数并非必要。这项回顾性单中心研究探讨了一种基于深度学习的早期预警系统——VitalCare-主要不良事件评分,提前6小时预测成年住院患者非计划性重症监护病房转诊、心脏骤停或死亡的能力。我们使用查尔森合并症指数(CCI)对患者进行分类,并评估病情严重程度高且实验室数据量较大的患者是否从更全面的输入中获益。总体而言,CCI评分高的患者接受的检查更多,缺失值更少,而CCI评分中低的患者接受的检查更少,缺失数据更多。然而,在事件队列中,高CCI组和中低CCI组的缺失值比例和模式相似。该模型在两组中的判别能力均保持稳健,这意味着数据缺失的临床背景比可用数据的原始数量更为重要。这些发现支持了对数据完整性的细致看法,并突出表明保留实验室检查医嘱的真实模式可能会提高预测性能。