ArticleJMIR medical informatics2026
Machine Learning to Prioritize High-Severity Patient Safety Events for Institutional Investigation: Algorithm Development and Validation Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient safety events (PSEs) are preventable incidents that cause, or have the potential to cause, harm to patients during their medical journey. Although incident reporting systems capture large volumes of such events, only a small proportion undergo comprehensive investigation due to the resource-intensive nature of the review process. Patient safety specialists are tasked with triaging PSEs to prioritize high-severity cases that warrant timely institutional investigation; however, the rapidly increasing volume of events has made manual triage increasingly impractical.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and validate ranking-based machine learning models for prioritizing high-severity PSEs and to compare their performance with conventional classification-based models and the reporter-assigned severity baseline.
methodsA total of 101,239 PSE reports were retrospectively extracted from a large Canadian academic health system between January 2017 and March 2025. Each report included a free-text incident description and a corresponding severity label denoting the level of severity, assigned through an institutional review process. Both feature-based and transformer-based models were developed using ranking and classification frameworks. Model performance was evaluated using ranking metrics, including average precision and normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) at multiple cutoff thresholds (k=10, 20, 50, 100, 200), as well as Precision@k and Recall@k. The best-performing model was further benchmarked against the reporter-assigned severity baseline.
resultsThe ranking model, LLAMA3.1-RA, achieved the highest mean average precision of 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.98), representing a 22.1% relative improvement over the best classification model (LLAMA3.1-CL: mean 0.77, 95% CI 0.72-0.82; P<.001). LLAMA3.1-RA demonstrated superior performance across 10 of 16 evaluation metrics, with larger relative gains at broader evaluation cutoffs (eg, +12.9% in NDCG@200, +21.1% in Precision@200, and +20.3% in Recall@200). Compared with the reporter-assigned severity baseline, LLAMA3.1-RA achieved significantly higher performance across all 16 metrics, retrieving 83.0% of high-severity PSEs within the top 200 ranked events, compared with 41.0% retrieved under the reporter-assigned severity baseline.
conclusionsLLAMA3.1-RA demonstrated superior capability in prioritizing high-severity PSEs compared with both classification approaches and the reporter-assigned severity baseline. Integrating this model into triage workflows may offer a scalable and efficient solution for identifying and prioritizing high-severity safety events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.