Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 電機資訊學院
  3. 資訊網路與多媒體研究所
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98728
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor傅立成zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorLi-Chen Fuen
dc.contributor.author許舒茵zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorSu-Yin Hsuen
dc.date.accessioned2025-08-18T16:15:30Z-
dc.date.available2025-08-19-
dc.date.copyright2025-08-18-
dc.date.issued2025-
dc.date.submitted2025-08-08-
dc.identifier.citation[1] Yury Gorishniy, Ivan Rubachev, Valentin Khrulkov, and Artem Babenko. Revisiting deep learning models for tabular data, 2021.
[2] Y. Lecun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffner. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 86(11):2278–2324, 1998.
[3] Shaojie Bai, J. Zico Kolter, and Vladlen Koltun. An empirical evaluation of generic convolutional and recurrent networks for sequence modeling, 2018.
[4] Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan. 2018 health and welfare report–emergency department statistics, 2019. Accessed: 2025-04-08.
[5] Salvatore Di Somma, Lorenzo Paladino, Louella Vaughan, Irene Lalle, Laura Magrini, and Massimo Magnanti. Overcrowding in emergency department: an international issue. Internal and Emergency Medicine, 10(2):171–175, December 2014.
[6] Chin-Yen Han, Li-Chin Chen, Alan Barnard, Chun-Chih Lin, Ya-Chu Hsiao, Hsueh-Erh Liu, and Wen Chang. Early revisit to the emergency department: An integrative review. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 41(4):285–295, July 2015.
[7] John Cheng, Amita Shroff, Naghma Khan, and Shabnam Jain. Emergency department return visits resulting in admission: Do they reflect quality of care? American Journal of Medical Quality, 31(6):541–551, July 2016.
[8] Keng-Wei Hu, Yu-Hui Lu, Hung-Jung Lin, How-Ran Guo, and Ning-Ping Foo. Unscheduled return visits with and without admission post emergency department discharge. The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 43(6):1110–1118, December 2012.
[9] I-Ting Tsai, Cheuk-Kwan Sun, Chao-Sung Chang, Kuo-Hsin Lee, Chih-Yu Liang, and Chih-Wei Hsu. Characteristics and outcomes of patients with emergency department revisits within 72 hours and subsequent admission to the intensive care unit. Tzu Chi Medical Journal, 28(4):151–156, December 2016.
[10] Chih-Wei Sung, Tsung-Chien Lu, Cheng-Chung Fang, Jia-You Lin, Huang-Fu Yeh, Chien-Hua Huang, and Chu-Lin Tsai. Factors associated with a high-risk return visit to the emergency department: a case-crossover study. European Journal of Emergency Medicine, 28(5):394–401, June 2021.
[11] Shih-Yu Cheng, Hui-Ting Wang, Chi-Wei Lee, Tsung-Cheng Tsai, Chi-Wei Hung, and Kuan-Han Wu. The characteristics and prognostic predictors of unplanned hospital admission within 72 hours after ed discharge. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 31(10):1490–1494, October 2013.
[12] Gene Pellerin, Kelly Gao, and Laurence Kaminsky. Predicting 72-hour emergency department revisits. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 36(3):420–424, March 2018.
[13] Shiying Hao, Bo Jin, Andrew Young Shin, Yifan Zhao, Chunqing Zhu, Zhen Li, Zhongkai Hu, Changlin Fu, Jun Ji, Yong Wang, Yingzhen Zhao, Dorothy Dai, Devore S. Culver, Shaun T. Alfreds, Todd Rogow, Frank Stearns, Karl G. Sylvester, Eric Widen, and Xuefeng B. Ling. Risk prediction of emergency department revisit 30 days post discharge: A prospective study. PLoS ONE, 9(11):e112944, November 2014.
[14] Leo Breiman. Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1):5–32, 2001.
[15] Tianqi Chen and Carlos Guestrin. Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD '16, page 785–794. ACM, August 2016.
[16] Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Long short-term memory. Neural Computation, 9(8):1735–1780, November 1997.
[17] Yu-Wei Lin, Yuqian Zhou, Faraz Faghri, Michael J. Shaw, and Roy H. Campbell. Analysis and prediction of unplanned intensive care unit readmission using recurrent neural networks with long short-term memory. PLOS ONE, 14(7):e0218942, July 2019.
[18] Tahmina Zebin and Thierry J. Chaussalet. Design and implementation of a deep recurrent model for prediction of readmission in urgent care using electronic health records. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (CIBCB), page 1–5. IEEE, July 2019.
[19] Chih-Wei Sung, Joshua Ho, Cheng-Yi Fan, Ching-Yu Chen, Chi-Hsin Chen, Shao-Yung Lin, Jia-How Chang, Jiun-Wei Chen, and Edward Pei-Chuan Huang. Prediction of high-risk emergency department revisits from a machine-learning algorithm: a proof-of-concept study. BMJ Health amp; Care Informatics, 31(1):e100859, April 2024.
[20] Mi‐Na Kim, Yong Seok Lee, Youngmin Park, Ayoung Jung, Hanjee So, Joonwoong Park, Jin‐Joo Park, Dong‐Joo Choi, So‐Ree Kim, and Seong‐Mi Park. Deep learning for predicting rehospitalization in acute heart failure: Model foundation and external validation. ESC Heart Failure, 11(6):3702–3712, July 2024.
[21] Kevin Lopez, Huan Li, Zachary Lipkin-Moore, Shannon Kay, Haseena Rajeevan, J. Lucian Davis, F. Perry Wilson, Carolyn L. Rochester, and Jose L. Gomez. Deep learning prediction of hospital readmissions for asthma and copd. Respiratory Research, 24(1), December 2023.
[22] Awais Ashfaq, Anita Sant'Anna, Markus Lingman, and Sławomir Nowaczyk. Readmission prediction using deep learning on electronic health records. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 97:103256, September 2019.
[23] Siyi Tang, Amara Tariq, Jared A. Dunnmon, Umesh Sharma, Praneetha Elugunti, Daniel L. Rubin, Bhavik N. Patel, and Imon Banerjee. Predicting 30-day all-cause hospital readmission using multimodal spatiotemporal graph neural networks. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, page 1–12, 2023.
[24] Brian Kenji Iwana and Seiichi Uchida. An empirical survey of data augmentation for time series classification with neural networks. PLOS ONE, 16(7):e0254841, July 2021.
[25] Qinhua Tang, Xingxing Cen, and Changqing Pan. Explainable and efficient deep early warning system for cardiac arrest prediction from electronic health records. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 19(10):9825–9841, 2022.
[26] Maksims Kazijevs and Manar D. Samad. Deep imputation of missing values in time series health data: A review with benchmarking. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 144:104440, August 2023.
[27] Jyun-Yi Wang, Su-Yin Hsu, Jen-Tang Sun, Chia-Hsin Ko, Chien-Hua Huang, Chu-Lin Tsai, and Li-Chen Fu. Internal and external validation of a deep learning-based early warning system of cardiac arrest with variable-length and irregularly measured time series data. Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research, February 2025.
[28] Joseph Berkson. Application of the logistic function to bio-assay. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 39(227):357–365, 1944.
[29] Rong-En Fan, Kai-Wei Chang, Cho-Jui Hsieh, Xiang-Rui Wang, and Chih-Jen Lin. Liblinear: A library for large linear classification. Journal of machine learning research, 9(Aug):1871–1874, 2008.
[30] Fatemeh Ismail and et al. Benchmarking deep learning interpretability in time series classification. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, pages 2633–2643, 2020.
-
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98728-
dc.description.abstract急診室(ED)再回診是急診醫學領域中一個重要的議題。若能準確預測患者再次於急診室就診的可能性,可以為主治醫師在評估患者出院與否時提供有價值的決策支援。在所有再回診病例中,識別高風險再回診尤為重要,因其可能表示患者的初始緊急護理不足,也是急診室評估醫療量能的一個指標。
儘管目前的研究已經提出了幾種用於預測急診室再回診的機器學習模型,但迄今為止,還沒有專門為此任務開發的基於深度學習之模型。且過去研究多著重於使用靜態特徵做預測,較少有效利用動態特徵。
在此研究中,我們使用了台大醫院急診室(NTUH)所提供之資料集,包含靜態與動態特徵。靜態特徵為病患進入急診室後紀錄之基本資料,如性別、年齡、檢傷級數等。動態特徵為患者在急診室暫留期間所測量之生命徵象,如血氧、心率等等。我們設計了一種資料預處理策略來解決動態特徵時間序列的不規則性,並提出了一個由TCN和FT-Transformer組成的混合模型。透過混合架構,我們的模型可以整合靜態和短期時間特徵以更全面地學習患者狀態,增強對潛在急診再回診病例的識別與預測,並克服僅依賴靜態特徵的模型的局限性。
首先,我們使用2016年至2019年的NTUH資料集來評估該模型。我們的模型在高風險回診預測任務中達到了0.8453的AUROC和 0.0935 的AUPRC;在一般回診預測任務中達到了0.7250的 AUROC和0.2005的AUPRC。接著,我們也利用NTUH 2020年至2022年的急診資料集作為我們的內部驗證集,並且在高風險再回診預測任務中實現了0.7976的AUROC和0.0103的AUPRC;在一般再回診預測任務中實現了0.7300的AUROC和0.1537的AUPRC。這兩個結果都明顯優於僅靜態的邏輯迴歸,AUPRC提高了約3.24倍,precision從0.0281提高到0.0428,提高了約1.52倍。此外,我們進行了特徵重要性分析,顯示心率對預測結果的影響最大。我們還進行了案例研究,以確定有助於模型預測的關鍵患者特徵。結果表明,我們的模型有效地整合了動態時間序列和靜態表格特徵,在預測急診再回診方面具有可靠的性能。這凸顯了融合不同類型的臨床資料來源以改善早期風險識別的潛力。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractEmergency Department (ED) revisits represent a critical issue in emergency medicine. The ability to accurately predict whether a patient will return to the ED after discharge can provide valuable decision support for attending physicians. Identifying high-risk revisit cases is particularly important, as such events may reflect inadequate initial emergency care and serve as an indicator of the ED's medical capacity.
Although prior studies have developed several machine learning models to predict ED revisits, there remains a lack of deep learning models specifically designed for this task. In addition, previous works have focused primarily on static features, while dynamic features have been underutilized.
In this study, we utilize a dataset provided by National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) and incorporate both static and dynamic features for model training and evaluation. Static features include demographic and triage data collected upon ED admission, such as age, sex, and triage level. Dynamic features consist of vital signs measured throughout the ED stay, including blood oxygen saturation and heart rate. We design a preprocessing strategy to handle the irregularity of time series data and propose a hybrid deep learning model combining Temporal Convolutional Network(TCN) and FT-Transformer. This architecture enables integration of both static and short-term dynamic features to more comprehensively represent patient states, thereby overcoming the limitations of models that rely solely on static features and in turn improving the prediction of potential ED revisit cases.
We first evaluate our model using NTUH data from 2016 to 2019. The model achieves AUROC of 0.8453 and AUPRC of 0.0935 in the high-risk revisit task, and AUROC of 0.7250 and AUPRC of 0.2005 in the general revisit task. We then validate the model using internal NTUH data from 2020 to 2022, where it achieves AUROC of 0.7976 and AUPRC of 0.0103 in the high-risk task, and AUROC of 0.7300 and AUPRC of 0.1537 in the general task. These results significantly outperform the static-only logistic regression baseline, with AUPRC being improved to approximately 3.24 times and precision being increased from 0.0281 to 0.0428 (about 1.52 times). Feature importance analysis indicates that the heart rate is the most influential dynamic factor. Furthermore, we conduct case studies to identify key patient features that contribute to the model's predictions.
Our results demonstrate that the proposed model effectively integrates dynamic time series data and static tabular data, producing reliable performance in predicting ED revisits. This highlights the potential of multimodal clinical data fusion in improving revisit prediction and supporting clinical decision-making.
en
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-08-18T16:15:30Z
No. of bitstreams: 0
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2025-08-18T16:15:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0en
dc.description.tableofcontentsAcknowledgements i
摘要 iii
Abstract v
Contents viii
List of Figures xii
List of Tables xiv
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3.1 Irregularity of measurements and missing values . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3.2 Limitations of Static Feature-Based Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3.3 Highly imbalanced data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3.4 The Value of Short-Term Time Series Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Related Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.5 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.5.1 Concerning Data Length Irregularity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5.2 Concerning limitations of Static Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5.3 Concerning Data Imbalanced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5.4 Concerning short-term Time Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.6 Thesis Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Chapter 2 Preliminaries 11
2.1 FT-Transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1.1 Feature Tokenization and Embedding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.2 Transformer Encoder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 Convolutional Neural Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2.1 Convolutional Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.2 Pooling Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2.3 Fully Connected Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.3 Temporal Convolutional Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3.1 Causal Convolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3.2 Dilated Convolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Chapter 3 Methodology 22
3.1 System Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2 Data Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3 Data Preprocessing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3.1 Dynamic Feature Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3.2 Tabular Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.4 Data Augmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.4.1 Window Shifting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.4.2 Random Transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.4.3 Over-Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.5 Hybrid Model Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.5.1 Temporal Convolutional Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.5.2 FT-Transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.5.3 Fusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.5.4 Loss Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.5.5 Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Chapter 4 Experiments 41
4.1 Experiments Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.1.1 System Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.1.2 Dataset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.2 Evaluation Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.3 High-Risk Revisit Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.3.1 Results on NTUH 2016–2019 Dataset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.3.2 Internal Validation on NTUH 2020–2022 Dataset . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.4 General Revisit Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.4.1 Results on NTUH 2016–2019 Dataset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.4.2 Internal Validation on NTUH 2020–2022 Dataset . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.5 Ablation Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.5.1 Impact of Architectural Modules on Prediction Performance . . . . 51
4.5.2 Impact of Maximum Backward Window Shift on Model Performance 52
4.6 Interpretability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.6.1 Feature Importance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.6.2 Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Chapter 5 Conclusion 59
5.1 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
References 62
-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject急診室再回診zh_TW
dc.subject時序資料zh_TW
dc.subject深度學習zh_TW
dc.subjectDeep learningen
dc.subjectTime series dataen
dc.subjectEmergency department revisiten
dc.title融合靜態與動態特徵之深度學習模型以預測急診再回 診:開發與驗證研究zh_TW
dc.titleDeep Learning–Based Model with Static and Dynamic Features to Predict Emergency Department Revisit: Development and Validation Studyen
dc.typeThesis-
dc.date.schoolyear113-2-
dc.description.degree碩士-
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee蔡居霖;黃建華;張智星;林澤zh_TW
dc.contributor.oralexamcommitteeChu-Lin Tsai;Chien-Hua Huang;Jyh-Shing Jang;Che Linen
dc.subject.keyword時序資料,急診室再回診,深度學習,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordTime series data,Emergency department revisit,Deep learning,en
dc.relation.page66-
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202503039-
dc.rights.note同意授權(限校園內公開)-
dc.date.accepted2025-08-12-
dc.contributor.author-college電機資訊學院-
dc.contributor.author-dept資訊網路與多媒體研究所-
dc.date.embargo-lift2028-08-04-
顯示於系所單位:資訊網路與多媒體研究所

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-113-2.pdf
  未授權公開取用
2.39 MBAdobe PDF檢視/開啟
顯示文件簡單紀錄


系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved