Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Sanjat Kanjilal

dblp:266/8223 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Medical and health informatics · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Reinforcement learning · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Medical and health informatics
clinical decision support
0.412020
Treatment Policy Learning in Multiobjective Settings with Fully Observed Outcomes · KDD 2020
Medical and health informatics › precision medicine
dynamic treatment regime
0.412020
Treatment Policy Learning in Multiobjective Settings with Fully Observed Outcomes · KDD 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

predictive modeling · 0.9direct policy learning · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Treatment Policy Learning in Multiobjective Settings with Fully Observed Outcomes
abstract
In several medical decision-making problems, such as antibiotic prescription, laboratory testing can provide precise indications for how a patient will respond to different treatment options. This enables us to "fully observe" all potential treatment outcomes, but while present in historical data, these results are infeasible to produce in real-time at the point of the initial treatment decision. Moreover, treatment policies in these settings often need to trade off between multiple competing objectives, such as effectiveness of treatment and harmful side effects. We present, compare, and evaluate three approaches for learning individualized treatment policies in this setting: First, we consider two indirect approaches, which use predictive models of treatment response to construct policies optimal for different trade-offs between objectives. Second, we consider a direct approach that constructs such a set of policies without intermediate models of outcomes. Using a medical dataset of Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) patients, we show that all approaches learn policies that achieve strictly better performance on all outcomes than clinicians, while also trading off between different objectives. We demonstrate additional benefits of the direct approach, including flexibly incorporating other goals such as deferral to physicians on simple cases.
Sooraj Boominathan, Michael Oberst, Helen Zhou, Sanjat Kanjilal, David A. Sontag
KDD4