arXiv subjects

Craig S. Jabaley

Publications and source records attributed to Craig S. Jabaley.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Learning a Continuous Sepsis Severity Score Without Hour-by-Hour Supervision: A Two-Site Retrospective Study

Currently used sepsis severity indices rely on fixed variables and weights established decades ago, which are coarsely discretized and calibrated to a cohort that no longer reflects contemporary critical care. No alternative learned directly from patient trajectories is in routine use. We conducted a retrospective two-cohort study on a total of 29,116 and 7,691 adult patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria from two hospital systems in Massachusetts and Georgie, respectively. We developed a sepsis index using 43 routinely charted variables over a 72-hour treatment window. Unlike previous studies, we use mortality as a treatment-level ranking signal rather than a per-state target, allowing credit to be redistributed non-uniformly across timesteps. Evaluation was done on a permanent 20% test holdout, using clinical vignettes and Spearman correlation. Uncertainty intervals were obtained by bootstrap resampling of whole patients. Under this ranking scheme, non-survivors scored 1.19-1.64 points higher than survivors on a 0-10 scale within all strata of baseline SOFA-2, with similar results stratifying within lactate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and creatinine. Within-patient change in the index correlated with change in lactate (Spearman rho = 0.39; n = 1,854). Similar, weaker correlations were found for MAP and creatinine. On a cohort level, cross-institutional agreement measured by Spearman correlation between models trained on different sites, were 70-77% of same-site correlation. External within-patient correlations were 0.54 and 0.59 against ceilings of 0.92 and 0.90. Our index also correlated with established indices, while null controls stayed near zero. Our index demonstrated hourly prognostic information that meaningfully separates patient outcomes and is consistent with clinical expectation, indicating potential as a decision support tool complementing clinical judgement.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Evaluation of General Large Language Models in Contextually Assessing Semantic Concepts Extracted from Adult Critical Care Electronic Health Record Notes

The field of healthcare has increasingly turned its focus towards Large Language Models (LLMs) due to their remarkable performance. However, their performance in actual clinical applications has been underexplored. Traditional evaluations based on question-answering tasks don't fully capture the nuanced contexts. This gap highlights the need for more in-depth and practical assessments of LLMs in real-world healthcare settings. Objective: We sought to evaluate the performance of LLMs in the complex clinical context of adult critical care medicine using systematic and comprehensible analytic methods, including clinician annotation and adjudication. Methods: We investigated the performance of three general LLMs in understanding and processing real-world clinical notes. Concepts from 150 clinical notes were identified by MetaMap and then labeled by 9 clinicians. Each LLM's proficiency was evaluated by identifying the temporality and negation of these concepts using different prompts for an in-depth analysis. Results: GPT-4 showed overall superior performance compared to other LLMs. In contrast, both GPT-3.5 and text-davinci-003 exhibit enhanced performance when the appropriate prompting strategies are employed. The GPT family models have demonstrated considerable efficiency, evidenced by their cost-effectiveness and time-saving capabilities. Conclusion: A comprehensive qualitative performance evaluation framework for LLMs is developed and operationalized. This framework goes beyond singular performance aspects. With expert annotations, this methodology not only validates LLMs' capabilities in processing complex medical data but also establishes a benchmark for future LLM evaluations across specialized domains.

cs.CL↗