Objective: To propose and retrospectively validate an integrated framework addressing three barriers to clinical translation of readmission prediction: lack of explainability, absence of deployment reliability infrastructure, and inadequate demographic fairness evaluation. Materials and Methods: We constructed a cohort of 415231 adult admissions from the MIMIC-IV database (30-day readmission prevalence 18.0%), split 70/15/15. Logistic regression, XGBoost, and LightGBM models were trained on 26 features. SHAP provided per-patient explanations. Fairness was evaluated across 16 subgroups using AUC-ROC, false negative rate (FNR), and positive predictive value (PPV). Calibration was assessed using Brier scores and calibration curves. Results: XGBoost achieved AUC-ROC 0.696 (95% CI 0.691-0.701), outperforming or matching the LACE baseline (AUC 0.60-0.68). LightGBM achieved best calibration (Brier 0.146). Prior admissions were the dominant predictor. All subgroups met equity thresholds (delta AUC <= 0.05, delta FNR <= 0.10). Conclusion: This framework delivers competitive performance, clinically actionable explanations, and strong demographic equity. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/Tomisin92/readmission-prediction.
Recent approaches to 30-day hospital readmission prediction rely on pre-trained language models applied to discharge summaries. Although these methods achieve strong performance, they depend on the availability of clinical notes, incur substantial computational costs, and yield representations that lack interpretability. We propose a knowledge-enriched feature representation that augments structured Electronic Health Record (EHR) data with four medical knowledge sources: disease ontology mapping, procedure classification, drug ingredient vocabulary, and organ system laboratory aggregation, without using clinical notes. Each feature dimension corresponds to a named clinical concept, yielding a sparse and interpretable patient representation. The approach is evaluated with six classifiers on a MIMIC-IV v2.2 cohort. Under 20-fold cross-validation, the best configuration achieves an AUROC of 0.743. This performance is comparable to that of previously reported methods on this dataset, including both those using only structured data and those incorporating clinical notes, while requiring considerably less computational cost. Interpretability analysis shows that demographics, organ system labs, drug ingredient features, and first-level ontology disease categories drive prediction, while deeper hierarchy levels contribute negligibly. These findings indicate that knowledge-enriched structured features offer a competitive and efficient alternative to embeddings from clinical notes for 30-day readmission prediction.
We convert black-box clinical prediction models for tabular data into standalone nomograms that can be audited term by term. PRiSM (Partial Responses in Structured Models) takes the shape of each effect and interaction from the source model, not merely which variables mattered, and lets the outcome select and weight them. We tested this in 50,356 heart transplant recipients, with validation in a later era than training. Nomograms from all 5 source models - a public clinical risk score, logistic regression, neural networks, random forests and extreme gradient boosting - met a prespecified noninferiority criterion for discrimination before any further simplification, and generally preserved calibration and clinical net benefit. Those from the 3 machine-learning models showed no detectable difference in discrimination from de novo generalized additive and explainable boosting models, exceeded neural additive models, and carried fewer terms than the explainable boosting model. PRiSM is released as an open-source Python package.
Henry Pigot, Paulo J. G. Lisboa, Sandra Ortega-Martorell +3
Fairness audits in clinical Artificial Intelligence convert continuous fairness metrics into binary pass-or-fail verdicts against operational thresholds, where hospital governance boards, payers, and regulators act on the resulting verdicts. Such audits are repeated over time and across hospital sites, thus the same verdict can flip between pass and fail across audits. Existing uncertainty methods such as Bayesian posteriors, bootstrap confidence intervals, and permutation tests address verdict instability only at the continuous-metric level. Converting metric-level uncertainty into a verdict-stability claim remains a manual step that scales poorly across the (model, metric, attribute) cells an audit covers. Existing uncertainty methods also leave open whether bias-mitigation steps, such as reweighing or per-group threshold shifts, yield a stable passing verdict at the cost of model discrimination measured as AUROC or AUPRC.To address this verdict-stability gap, we propose VFR-Audit, a framework built around the Verdict Flip Rate (VFR), a scalar bounded between 0 and 0.5 that measures the probability of verdict reversal under stratified bootstrap resampling. VFR-Audit reports VFR alongside three reliability axes, namely within-cohort resampling stability, audit-size sensitivity, and cross-hospital verdict agreement via Fleiss' kappa.