OBJECTIVE: The timely stratification of trauma injury severity can enhance the quality of trauma care but it requires intense manual annotation from certified trauma coders. The objective of this study is to develop machine learning models for the stratification of trauma injury severity across various body regions using clinical text and structured electronic health records (EHRs) data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study utilized clinical documents and structured EHR variables linked with the trauma registry data to create 2 machine learning models with different approaches to representing text. The first one fuses concept unique identifiers (CUIs) extracted from free text with structured EHR variables, while the second one integrates free text with structured EHR variables. Temporal validation was undertaken to ensure the models' temporal generalizability. Additionally, analyses to assess the variable importance were conducted. RESULTS: Both models demonstrated impressive performance in categorizing leg injuries, achieving high accuracy with macro-F1 scores of over 0.8. Additionally, they showed considerable accuracy, with macro-F1 scores exceeding or near 0.7, in assessing injuries in the areas of the chest and head. We showed in our variable importance analysis that the most important features in the model have strong face validity in determining clinically relevant trauma injuries. DISCUSSION: The CUI-based model achieves comparable performance, if not higher, compared to the free-text-based model, with reduced complexity. Furthermore, integrating structured EHR data improves performance, particularly when the text modalities are insufficiently indicative. CONCLUSIONS: Our multi-modal, multiclass models can provide accurate stratification of trauma injury severity and clinically relevant interpretations.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop machine learning models that provide both accurate and equitable predictions of 2-year stroke risk for patients with atrial fibrillation across diverse racial groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study utilized structured electronic health records (EHR) data from the All of Us Research Program. Machine learning models (LightGBM) were utilized to capture the relations between stroke risks and the predictors used by the widely recognized CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores. We mitigated the racial disparity by creating a representative tuning set, customizing tuning criteria, and setting binary thresholds separately for subgroups. We constructed a hold-out test set that not only supports temporal validation but also includes a larger proportion of Black/African Americans for fairness validation. RESULTS: Compared to the original CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores, significant improvements were achieved by modeling their predictors using machine learning models (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve from near 0.70 to above 0.80). Furthermore, applying our disparity mitigation strategies can effectively enhance model fairness compared to the conventional cross-validation approach. DISCUSSION: Modeling CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc risk factors with LightGBM and our disparity mitigation strategies achieved decent discriminative performance and excellent fairness performance. In addition, this approach can provide a complete interpretation of each predictor. These highlight its potential utility in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Our research presents a practical example of addressing clinical challenges through the All of Us Research Program data. The disparity mitigation framework we proposed is adaptable across various models and data modalities, demonstrating broad potential in clinical informatics.

OBJECTIVE: Applications of machine learning in healthcare are of high interest and have the potential to improve patient care. Yet, the real-world accuracy of these models in clinical practice and on different patient subpopulations remains unclear. To address these important questions, we hosted a community challenge to evaluate methods that predict healthcare outcomes. We focused on the prediction of all-cause mortality as the community challenge question. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a Model-to-Data framework, 345 registered participants, coalescing into 25 independent teams, spread over 3 continents and 10 countries, generated 25 accurate models all trained on a dataset of over 1.1 million patients and evaluated on patients prospectively collected over a 1-year observation of a large health system. RESULTS: The top performing team achieved a final area under the receiver operator curve of 0.947 (95% CI, 0.942-0.951) and an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.487 (95% CI, 0.458-0.499) on a prospectively collected patient cohort. DISCUSSION: Post hoc analysis after the challenge revealed that models differ in accuracy on subpopulations, delineated by race or gender, even when they are trained on the same data. CONCLUSION: This is the largest community challenge focused on the evaluation of state-of-the-art machine learning methods in a healthcare system performed to date, revealing both opportunities and pitfalls of clinical AI.