Key result
A machine learning model trained to predict cost achieved a higher maximum utility of $-12,472 per patient compared to $-12,645 for a readmission prediction model, despite lower discriminative performance.
Why the study?
Machine learning models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions are typically selected by discriminative ability, which may not translate into resource allocation utility; whether models rank differently by utility versus discrimination was unknown.
Do machine learning models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions rank differently based on overall utility and discriminative performance?
Observational (n=513,495)
Yes
Do machine learning models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions rank differently based on overall utility and discriminative performance?
Absolute Event Rate: -12472% vs -12645%
p-value: p=<0.001
Machine learning models for allocating limited health resources should be evaluated and optimized based on overall utility rather than just discriminative performance.
Model rankings for readmission intervention allocation may shift with utility metrics; leaves open optimal selection for deployment.
Structured Abstract Importance Machine learning (ML) models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions are typically selected according to their discriminative ability, which may not necessarily translate into utility in allocation of resources. Objective To determine whether ML models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions are ranked differently based on their overall utility and their discriminative ability. Design A retrospective analysis of ML models using claims data acquired from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart. Setting Health plan claims from all 50 states for commercially-insured individuals. Participants 513,495 patients who were admitted as inpatients over the period January 2016 through January 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures Maximum utility achieved by three machine learning models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions, determined using cost accrued in the 90 days post-discharge of an index admission and estimated counterfactual cost. Data were analyzed between April 2019 and March 2020. Results The study sample consisted of 513,495 patients (mean [SD] age 69 [19] years; 294,895 [57%] Female) mean 90 day cost of $11,552 for the study period. Allocating readmission-mitigating interventions based on a LightGBM model trained to predict readmissions achieved a maximum utility of $-12,645 per patient, and an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.74, 0.75); allocating interventions based on a model trained to predict cost as a proxy achieved a higher maximum utility of $-12,472 per patient, and an AUC of 0.63 (95% CI 0.62, 0.63). A hybrid model combining both intervention strategies achieved a maximum utility of $-12,472, and an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI 0.71, 0.71), comparable with the best models on either metric. Conclusion and Relevance We demonstrate that machine learning models may be ranked differently based on overall utility and discriminative ability. Machine learning models for allocation of limited health resources should consider directly optimizing for utility. Key points Question Do machine learning models for allocating readmission-mitigating interventions rank differently based on overall utility and discriminative performance? Finding A machine learning model predicting a patient’s future cost of care was able to achieve higher utility than a readmission risk prediction model, even though it had a lower discriminative performance in predicting readmissions. Meaning Our study suggests that machine learning models guiding allocation of limited health resources may consider evaluating and optimizing on utility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ko et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Hospital readmission (n=513,495). Cost prediction machine learning model vs. Readmission prediction machine learning model was evaluated on Maximum utility per patient (in dollars) (p=<0.001). A machine learning model trained to predict cost achieved a higher maximum utility of $-12,472 per patient compared to $-12,645 for a readmission prediction model, despite lower discriminative performance.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: