The risk stratification of patients in the emergency department begins at triage. It is vital to stratify patients early based on their severity, since undertriage can lead to increased morbidity, mortality and costs. Our aim was to present a new approach to assist healthcare professionals at triage in the stratification of patients and in identifying those with higher risk of ICU admission. Adult patients assigned Manchester Triage System (MTS) or Emergency Severity Index (ESI) 1 to 3 from a Portuguese and a United States Emergency Departments were analyzed. Variables routinely collected at triage were used and natural language processing was applied to the patient chief complaint. Stratified random sampling was applied to split the data in train (70%) and test (30%) sets and 10-fold cross validation was performed for model training. Logistic regression, random forests, and a random undersampling boosting algorithm were used. We compared the performance obtained with the reference model—using only triage priorities—with the models using additional variables. For both hospitals, a logistic regression model achieved higher overall performance, yielding areas under the receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall curves of 0.91 (95% CI 0.90-0.92) and 0.30 (95% CI 0.27-0.33) for the United States hospital and of 0.85 (95% CI 0.83-0.86) and 0.06 (95% CI 0.05-0.07) for the Portuguese hospital. Heart rate, pulse oximetry, respiratory rate and systolic blood pressure were the most important predictors of ICU admission. Compared to the reference models, the models using clinical variables and the chief complaint presented higher recall for patients assigned MTS/ESI 3 and can identify patients assigned MTS/ESI 3 who are at risk for ICU admission.

Emergency department triage is the first point in time when a patient’s acuity level is determined. The time to assign a priority at triage is short and it is vital to accurately stratify patients at this stage, since under-triage can lead to increased morbidity, mortality and costs. Our aim was to present a model that can assist healthcare professionals in triage decision making, namely in the stratification of patients through the risk prediction of a composite critical outcome—mortality and cardiopulmonary arrest. Our study cohort consisted of 235826 adult patients triaged at a Portuguese Emergency Department from 2012 to 2016. Patients were assigned to emergent, very urgent or urgent priorities of the Manchester Triage System (MTS). Demographics, clinical variables routinely collected at triage and the patients’ chief complaint were used. Logistic regression, random forests and extreme gradient boosting were developed using all available variables. The term frequency–inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) natural language processing weighting factor was applied to vectorize the chief complaint. Stratified random sampling was used to split the data into train (70%) and test (30%) data sets. Ten-fold cross validation was performed in train to optimize model hyper-parameters. The performance obtained with the best model was compared against the reference model—a regularized logistic regression trained using only triage priorities. Extreme gradient boosting exhibited good calibration properties and yielded areas under the receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall curves of 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97) and 0.31 (95% CI 0.26-0.36), respectively. The predictors ranked with higher importance by this model were the Glasgow coma score, the patients’ age, pulse oximetry and arrival mode. Compared to the reference, the extreme gradient boosting model using clinical variables and the chief complaint presented higher recall for patients assigned MTS-3 and can identify those who are at risk of the composite outcome.

Background and Objectives: The validity of brain monitoring using electroencephalography (EEG), particularly to guide care in patients with acute or critical illness, requires that experts can reliably identify seizures and other potentially harmful rhythmic and periodic brain activity, collectively referred to as “ictal-interictal-injury continuum" (IIIC). Prior inter-rater reliability (IRR) studies are limited by small samples and selection bias. This study was conducted to assess the reliability of experts in identifying IIIC. Methods: This prospective analysis included 30 experts with subspecialty clinical neurophysiology training from 18 institutions. Experts independently scored varying numbers of ten-second EEG segments as: “Seizure (SZ)”, “Lateralized Periodic Discharges (LPD)”, “Generalized Periodic Discharges (GPD)”, “Lateralized Rhythmic Delta Activity (LRDA)”, “Generalized Rhythmic Delta Activity (GRDA)”, or “Other”. EEGs were performed for clinical indications at Massachusetts General Hospital between 2006 to 2020. Primary outcome measures were pairwise IRR (average percent agreement (PA) between pairs of experts) and majority IRR (average PA with group consensus) for each class; and beyond chance agreement (κ). Secondary outcomes were calibration of expert scoring to group consensus, and latent trait analysis to investigate contributions of bias and noise to scoring variability. Results: Among 2,711 EEGs, 49% were from females, and median (IQR) age was 55 (41). In total experts scored 50,697 EEG segments; the median [range] number scored by each expert was 6,287.5 [1,002, 45,267]. Overall pairwise IRR was moderate (PA 52%, κ 42%), and majority IRR was substantial (PA 65%, κ 61%). Noise-bias analysis demonstrated that a single underlying receiver operating curve can account for most variation in experts9 false positive vs true positive characteristics (median [range] of variance explained (R²): 95 [93, 98]%), and for most variation in experts’ precision vs sensitivity characteristics (R²: 75 [59, 89]%). Thus, variation between experts is mostly attributable not to differences in expertise, but rather to variation in decision thresholds. Discussion: Our results provide precise estimates of expert reliability from a large and diverse sample, and a parsimonious theory to explain the origin of disagreements between experts. The results also establish a standard for how well an automated IIIC classifier must perform to match experts. Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class II evidence that independent expert review reliably identifies ictal-interictal injury continuum patterns on EEG compared to expert consensus.

Background: Delirium in hospitalized patients is a syndrome of acute brain dysfunction. Diagnostic (International Classification of Diseases [ICD]) codes are often used in studies using electronic health records (EHRs), but they are inaccurate. Objective: We sought to develop a more accurate method using natural language processing (NLP) to detect delirium episodes on the basis of unstructured clinical notes. Methods: We collected 1.5 million notes from >10,000 patients from among 9 hospitals. Seven experts iteratively labeled 200,471 sentences. Using these, we trained three NLP classifiers: Support Vector Machine, Recurrent Neural Networks, and Transformer. Testing was performed using an external data set. We also evaluated associations with delirium billing (ICD) codes, medications, orders for restraints and sitters, direct assessments (Confusion Assessment Method [CAM] scores), and in-hospital mortality. F1 scores, confusion matrices, and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were used to compare NLP models. We used the φ coefficient to measure associations with other delirium indicators. Results: The transformer NLP performed best on the following parameters: micro F1=0.978, macro F1=0.918, positive AUC=0.984, and negative AUC=0.992. NLP detections exhibited higher correlations (φ) than ICD codes with deliriogenic medications (0.194 vs 0.073 for ICD codes), restraints and sitter orders (0.358 vs 0.177), mortality (0.216 vs 0.000), and CAM scores (0.256 vs –0.028). Conclusions: Clinical notes are an attractive alternative to ICD codes for EHR delirium studies but require automated methods. Our NLP model detects delirium with high accuracy, similar to manual chart review. Our NLP approach can provide more accurate determination of delirium for large-scale EHR-based studies regarding delirium, quality improvement, and clinical trails.