Prediction across healthcare settings: a case study in predicting emergency department disposition

Several approaches exist today for developing predictive models across multiple clinical sites, yet there is a lack of comparative data on their performance, especially within the context of EHR-based prediction models. We set out to provide a framework for prediction across healthcare settings. As a case study, we examined an ED disposition prediction model across three geographically and demographically diverse sites. We conducted a 1-year retrospective study, including all visits in which the outcome was either discharge-to-home or hospitalization. Four modeling approaches were compared: a ready-made model trained at one site and validated at other sites, a centralized uniform model incorporating data from all sites, multiple site-specific models, and a hybrid approach of a ready-made model re-calibrated using site-specific data. Predictions were performed using XGBoost. The study included 288,962 visits with an overall admission rate of 16.8% (7.9-26.9%). Some risk factors for admission were prominent across all sites (e.g., high-acuity triage emergency severity index score, high prior admissions rate), while others were prominent at only some sites (multiple lab tests ordered at the pediatric sites, early use of ECG at the adult site). The XGBoost model achieved its best performance using the uniform and site-specific approaches (AUC = 0.9-0.93), followed by the calibrated-model approach (AUC = 0.87-0.92), and the ready-made approach (AUC = 0.62-0.85). Our results show that site-specific customization is a key driver of predictive model performance.

Automated summary

The study demonstrates that site-specific customization is a key factor influencing the performance of predictive models, with uniform and site-specific approaches achieving the best performance, calibrated model approach following, and the ready-made approach showing the poorest performance.