{"title":"Predicting Dental General Anesthesia Use among Children with Behavioral Health Conditions.","authors":"J Peng, T J Gorham, B D Meyer","doi":"10.1177/23800844241252817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate how different data sources affect the performance of machine learning algorithms that predict dental general anesthesia use among children with behavioral health conditions.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Observational study using claims data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using Medicaid claims from Partners For Kids (2013-2019), electronic medical record data, and the Ohio Child Opportunity Index, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 12,410 children with behavioral health diagnoses. Four lasso-regularized logistic regression models were developed to predict dental general anesthesia use, each incorporating different data sources. Lift scores, or the ratio of positive predictive value to base case prevalence, were used to compare models, and a lift score of 2.5 was considered minimally acceptable for risk prediction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dental general anesthesia use ranged from 3.2% to 3.9% across models, which made it difficult for the machine learning models to achieve high positive predictive value. Model performance was best when either the electronic medical record (lift = 2.59) or Ohio Child Opportunity Index (lift = 2.56), but not both (lift = 2.34) or neither (lift = 1.87), was used.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Incorporating additional data sources improved machine learning model performance, and 2 models achieved satisfactory performance. The model using electronic medical record data could be applied in hospital-based settings, and the model using the Ohio Child Opportunity Index could be more valuable in community-based settings.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>Machine learning was applied to satisfactorily predict which children with behavioral health diagnoses would require dental treatment under general anesthesia. Incorporating electronic medical record data or area-level social determinants of health data, but not both, improved the performance of the machine learning predictions. The 2 highest performing models could be applied by hospitals using medical record data or by organizations using area-level social determinants of health data to risk stratify the pediatric behavioral health population.</p>","PeriodicalId":14783,"journal":{"name":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","volume":" ","pages":"23800844241252817"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844241252817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate how different data sources affect the performance of machine learning algorithms that predict dental general anesthesia use among children with behavioral health conditions.
Study design: Observational study using claims data.
Methods: Using Medicaid claims from Partners For Kids (2013-2019), electronic medical record data, and the Ohio Child Opportunity Index, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 12,410 children with behavioral health diagnoses. Four lasso-regularized logistic regression models were developed to predict dental general anesthesia use, each incorporating different data sources. Lift scores, or the ratio of positive predictive value to base case prevalence, were used to compare models, and a lift score of 2.5 was considered minimally acceptable for risk prediction.
Results: Dental general anesthesia use ranged from 3.2% to 3.9% across models, which made it difficult for the machine learning models to achieve high positive predictive value. Model performance was best when either the electronic medical record (lift = 2.59) or Ohio Child Opportunity Index (lift = 2.56), but not both (lift = 2.34) or neither (lift = 1.87), was used.
Conclusions: Incorporating additional data sources improved machine learning model performance, and 2 models achieved satisfactory performance. The model using electronic medical record data could be applied in hospital-based settings, and the model using the Ohio Child Opportunity Index could be more valuable in community-based settings.
Knowledge transfer statement: Machine learning was applied to satisfactorily predict which children with behavioral health diagnoses would require dental treatment under general anesthesia. Incorporating electronic medical record data or area-level social determinants of health data, but not both, improved the performance of the machine learning predictions. The 2 highest performing models could be applied by hospitals using medical record data or by organizations using area-level social determinants of health data to risk stratify the pediatric behavioral health population.
期刊介绍:
JDR Clinical & Translational Research seeks to publish the highest quality research articles on clinical and translational research including all of the dental specialties and implantology. Examples include behavioral sciences, cariology, oral & pharyngeal cancer, disease diagnostics, evidence based health care delivery, human genetics, health services research, periodontal diseases, oral medicine, radiology, and pathology. The JDR Clinical & Translational Research expands on its research content by including high-impact health care and global oral health policy statements and systematic reviews of clinical concepts affecting clinical practice. Unique to the JDR Clinical & Translational Research are advances in clinical and translational medicine articles created to focus on research with an immediate potential to affect clinical therapy outcomes.