Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RETAIN: Interpretable Predictive Model in Healthcare using Reverse Time Attention Mechanism #189

Open
blengerich opened this issue Jan 7, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@blengerich
Copy link
Contributor

blengerich commented Jan 7, 2017

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.05745v3.pdf

Accuracy and interpretation are two goals of any successful predictive models. Most existing works have to suffer the tradeoff between the two by either picking complex black box models such as recurrent neural networks (RNN) or relying on less accurate traditional models with better interpretation such as logistic regression. To address this dilemma, we present REverse Time AttentIoN model (RETAIN) for analyzing Electronic Health Records (EHR) data that achieves high accuracy while remaining clinically interpretable. RETAIN is a two-level neural attention model that can find influential past visits and significant clinical variables within those visits (e.g,. key diagnoses). RETAIN mimics physician practice by attending the EHR data in a reverse time order so that more recent clinical visits will likely get higher attention. Experiments on a large real EHR dataset of 14 million visits from 263K patients over 8 years confirmed the comparable predictive accuracy and computational scalability to the state-of-the-art methods such as RNN. Finally, we demonstrate the clinical interpretation with concrete examples from RETAIN.

Would this paper be appropriate for either the EHR subsection of the "categorize" section or the Clinical Decision Making subsection of the "treat" section? It doesn't directly match patients with treatments, but it does prioritize clinical interpretability

@agitter
Copy link
Collaborator

agitter commented Jan 10, 2017

We haven't fully scoped the clinical decision making subsection so I'm not sure what exactly will go there. This is potentially a good fit. Are you interested in helping write about this, or other, topics?

Tagging @AvantiShri and @akundaje for relevance to the interpretation Discussion section as well.

@blengerich
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, I would be interested in helping to write about this. I can start a draft of the "Categorize" subsection of the treat section if you would like. If someone is already working on this, I'd also be willing to help write elsewhere.

@agitter
Copy link
Collaborator

agitter commented Jan 10, 2017

That would be excellent, no one is working on that to my knowledge. I'll update #188.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants