Selective prediction framework improves patient safety in clinical triage, suggesting cost-aware deferral reduces risk in sepsis prediction.
We propose a selective prediction framework for clinical triage that combines calibrated probabilistic modeling, conformal prediction, and cost-aware deferral to prioritize patient safety. The system produces set-valued predictions with finite-sample coverage control and defers low-confidence cases to clinicians when doing so reduces an explicit expected clinical cost. We construct prediction sets using split conformal prediction, a group-conditional Mondrian variant for gender-stratified coverage, and an importance-weighted variant to improve robustness under distribution shift, and we select a single deferral threshold by minimizing expected cost on a held-out calibration set. On temporally separated in-distribution and out-of-distribution test splits for early sepsis prediction, selective deferral yields a favorable risk–coverage trade-off, reducing error on retained cases by 49.6% on the in-distribution (ID) test split and 46.7% on the out-of-distribution (OOD) test split, both at 80% coverage, while achieving low expected cost on both splits with only a moderate increase under shift. Calibration remains strong with low expected calibration error on both test sets, and rule-out performance is conservative, attaining near-perfect negative predictive value at a 95% sensitivity target. Coverage stays close to the nominal 90% target in-distribution and degrades only slightly out-of-distribution, with the weighted method most robust, and the Mondrian method reduces the gender coverage gap to 1.4 percentage points. These results indicate that conformal uncertainty quantification combined with cost-aware deferral can provide transparent and safer clinical decision support that degrades gracefully under temporal distribution shift.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kwon et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: