手癣用什么药膏| 茉莉花什么时候开花| 下眼皮跳是什么原因| 空你几哇什么意思| 射频消融术是什么手术| 导诊是干什么的| 什么是纳囊| 双减是什么意思| 绿鼻涕是什么原因| 胸内科主要看什么病| 俄罗斯乌克兰为什么打仗| 佩奇是什么意思| 泊字五行属什么| 硬卧代硬座是什么意思| 肾阳虚是什么原因引起的| 肾挂什么科室| EPS什么意思| 文爱什么意思| 班门弄斧什么意思| 为什么子宫会隐隐作痛| 未融资是什么意思| 同舟共济什么意思| 椎间盘突出挂什么科| 院士相当于什么级别| 强化是什么意思| 复古是什么意思| 糖尿病吃什么主食最好| 负压引流器有什么作用| 什么是自限性疾病| 玛雅文明是古代什么文明的代表| 观音菩萨是保佑什么的| 什么情况下需要安装心脏起搏器| 萎缩性胃炎是什么原因引起的| 安全期一般是什么时候| 异象是什么意思| 什么东西泡水喝降血压| 我靠是什么意思| 内痔是什么样的图片| 人为什么会磨牙| 86年属什么生肖| 笑对人生是什么意思| 脾虚胃热吃什么中成药| 路演是什么意思| 吃李子有什么好处和坏处| 暴力倾向的人有什么表现| 检查阳性是什么意思| 滚去掉三点水念什么| 鳄鱼的尾巴有什么作用| levi是什么意思| 上颌窦囊肿是什么意思| 小狗可以吃什么| 生是什么意思| 发烧吃什么水果| 养生是什么意思| 手掌像什么| 听吧新征程号角吹响是什么歌| 胶质瘤是什么病| 血管造影是什么检查| 静脉曲张吃什么食物| 胶原蛋白有什么作用| 省政协委员是什么级别| 夜尿次数多是什么原因| 赵国是现在的什么地方| 淋巴瘤是什么症状| 强的松是什么药| 内向的人适合做什么工作| 过氧化氢是什么| omega3是什么| 宫缩什么感觉| 赘婿是什么意思| 做肠镜要做什么准备| 做肠镜前喝的是什么药| 空调开除湿有什么作用| 大夫古代指什么| 吃什么养心| 西施长什么样| slf是什么意思| 什么药膏可以去黑头| 巴马汤泡脚有什么功效| 牌匾是什么意思| 尿检3个加号什么意思| 爆表是什么意思| 脚气看什么科| 梦到死人了有什么兆头| 避孕套长什么样| 青霉素是什么| 利福喷丁和利福平有什么区别| 柠檬酸是什么东西| 妈妈的表妹叫什么| 杨桃长什么样| 精卫填海是什么故事| 唇珠是什么| 聚少离多是什么意思| 阳历6月21日是什么星座| 治疗早泄吃什么药| 四个月宝宝可以吃什么辅食| 盆腔积液什么症状| 结婚送什么| 胎儿生物物理评分8分什么意思| 为什么要小心AB型血的人| 别人梦见我死了是什么意思| 心什么如什么的成语| 中出是什么意识| 排除是什么意思| 惆怅是什么意思| 吃什么养肝护肝最好| 似曾相识是什么意思| 喜欢白色的人是什么性格| 2月9号什么星座| 四月十八是什么星座| 白狗子是什么意思| 手足口病是什么病| 国防部长是什么级别| 雷锋代表什么生肖| 换床有什么讲究| 阴霾是什么意思| 观音菩萨的坐骑是什么| 肺上有结节是什么病| 小腿红肿是什么原因引起的| 1996年出生属什么生肖| 口腔溃疡不能吃什么| 粑粑黑色是什么原因| 情愫是什么意思| o3是什么| 胎盘厚有什么影响| 曹操为什么杀华佗| 虚火吃什么药| 痂是什么意思| 晚上手脚发热是什么原因| 毕婚族是什么意思| 放臭屁是什么原因| 韫字五行属什么| 小便尿不出来什么原因| 铁是什么元素| 西藏有什么大学| 子宫内膜粘连有什么症状| 血性是什么意思| 高兴的反义词是什么| 绿色衣服搭配什么颜色的裤子| 土豆可以做什么美食| 最快的减肥运动是什么| 2022年是什么生肖年| 老人爱睡觉什么征兆| 为什么拉的屎是墨绿色| titus手表属于什么档次| 蓄谋已久什么意思| 羊奶有什么作用与功效| 鱼翅配什么煲汤最好| 硬核什么意思| 月经刚完同房为什么痛| 举不胜举的举是什么意思| 健康证检查什么| 人为什么要睡觉| 冬瓜什么时候种植最好| 胆固醇高吃什么食物最好| 气泡音是什么意思| 梦见被蛇咬是什么意思| 张飞穿针的歇后语是什么| 多汗症看什么科| 6月11号是什么星座| 吃豆腐有什么好处| 骨质增生挂什么科| 有龙则灵的灵是什么意思| 右侧卵巢无回声是什么意思| 痉挛什么意思| 身份证最后一位x是什么意思| 头发为什么会变黄| 空调开除湿有什么作用| 过是什么结构的字| 枣红色配什么颜色好看| 新房开火有什么讲究| 未退化胸腺是什么意思| 激动是什么意思| 下午四点多是什么时辰| 贼头贼脑是什么生肖| 梦见别人家拆房子是什么预兆| 冬虫虫念什么| 播客是什么意思| o型血与b型血生的孩子是什么血型| 花都有什么花| 胃炎是什么原因引起的| 石楠花是什么味道| 早搏吃什么药最管用| 什么沐浴露好用| 验血挂什么科| 脑梗吃什么| 熬笔是什么意思| 莆田系是什么意思啊| 盆腔炎做什么检查能查出来| 血压高应该吃什么食物| 女人肾虚是什么原因| 坐位体前屈是什么| 白头翁是什么生肖| 葫芦五行属什么| 植物神经是什么| 今年男宝宝取什么名字好| 直肠肿瘤不能吃什么| 卵巢囊性结构是什么| 全血低切相对指数偏高什么意思| 经常腰酸是什么原因女性| 身体抱恙是什么意思| mar是什么意思| 六味地黄丸是治什么的| 腰椎间盘突出看什么科| 后羿是什么生肖| 为什么同房后小腹疼痛| 3月18日什么星座| 开塞露有什么功效| 向日葵代表什么象征意义| 九头鸟是什么意思| 肾结石长什么样子图片| 动脉斑块是什么意思| 吃什么容易长胖| 梦到拔牙是什么预兆| 黄体酮不足吃什么| 什么泡茶好喝| 银925什么意思| 吃什么会变白| 小孩睡觉磨牙是什么原因引起的| 属鼠的贵人是什么属相| 片状低回声区什么意思| 输卵管堵塞吃什么药能打通| 什么是消融手术| 浑身没劲是什么原因| 小孩脸肿是什么原因引起的| 皮疹是什么原因引起的| 24小时动态脑电图能查出什么| 人授后吃什么容易着床| 捉奸什么意思| 窦性心动过缓伴不齐是什么意思| 大条是什么意思| 嘴巴苦吃什么药| 从商是什么意思| 梦见发大水是什么意思| 牛肉炖什么好吃又营养| 隶属什么意思| 喉结不明显的男生是什么原因| 螨虫用什么药膏| 中性粒细胞高是什么原因| 脚拇指外翻是什么原因造成的| 假正经是什么意思| 霉菌性阴道炎用什么药效果好| 狮子座是什么象| 干嘛是什么意思| 病毒性疣是什么病| 歹人是什么意思| 尿频尿急吃什么药最好| 孢子是什么| 6月15是什么星座| 绿豆跟什么一起煮最好| 圣女果是什么| 查血挂什么科| 5点是什么时辰| 什么的意思| 帛字五行属什么| 鳞状上皮细胞高是什么原因| 减肥喝什么水| 下关沱茶属于什么茶| 为什么腿会酸痛| 为什么招蚊子咬| 心脏支架和搭桥有什么区别| 毛滴虫病是什么病| 麒麟长什么样| 洋辣子蛰了用什么药| 百度
11institutetext: National Institute of Technology Silchar, Assam, India
11email: mukesh_pg23@cse.nits.ac.in and 11email: pinki@cse.nits.ac.in

ShowMeTheMoney306/03期中字 EP04中字在线观看

Mukesh Kumar Sahu 11 0009-0005-4007-7648 ?? Pinki Roy 22
Abstract
百度 还记得那些我们拼命想要凑齐的各版本最强装备吗?

Accurately predicting the criticalness of ICU patients (such as in-ICU mortality risk) is vital for early intervention in critical care. However, conventional models often treat each patient in isolation and struggle to exploit the relational structure in Electronic Health Records (EHR). We propose a Similarity-Based Self-Construct Graph Model (SBSCGM) that dynamically builds a patient similarity graph from multi-modal EHR data, and a HybridGraphMedGNN architecture that operates on this graph to predict patient mortality and a continuous criticalness score. SBSCGM uses a hybrid similarity measure (combining feature-based and structural similarities) to connect patients with analogous clinical profiles in real-time. The HybridGraphMedGNN integrates Graph Convolutional Network (GCN), GraphSAGE, and Graph Attention Network (GAT) layers to learn robust patient representations, leveraging both local and global graph patterns. In experiments on 6,000 ICU stays from the MIMIC-III dataset, our model achieves state-of-the-art performance (AUC-ROC 0.940.940.94) outperforming baseline classifiers and single-type GNN models. We also demonstrate improved precision/recall and show that the attention mechanism provides interpretable insights into model predictions. Our framework offers a scalable and interpretable solution for critical care risk prediction, with potential to support clinicians in real-world ICU deployment.

Keywords:
Electronic Health Records Graph Neural Networks ICU Mortality Prediction Dynamic Graph Multimodal Fusion Interpretability

1 Introduction

The widespread availability of large-scale electronic health records (EHRs) has created new opportunities for predictive modeling in critical care. However, ICU data is inherently high-dimensional, heterogeneous, and temporally dynamic, posing significant challenges for conventional learning systems. Most predictive models including logistic regression and Transformer-based EHR models (e.g., Med-BERT, Hi-BEHRT) treat patients independently and neglect underlying similarities between clinical trajectories, thereby missing relational patterns indicative of deterioration.

To address this, we propose modeling patients as a dynamic graph, where edges represent clinical similarity. We introduce the Similarity-Based Self-Construct Graph Model (SBSCGM), which builds a patient similarity graph in real time using a hybrid similarity function, and present HybridGraphMedGNN, a novel GNN architecture that integrates GCN, GraphSAGE, and GAT layers to exploit both local and global graph structures for ICU outcome prediction.

Our main contributions are as follows. First, we propose a dynamic, data-driven patient graph construction strategy that evolves with new ICU data, offering adaptability beyond static graph models. Second, we develop a hybrid similarity measure that combines cosine-based feature similarity and Jaccard-based structural similarity, allowing for robust edge formation. Third, we design a multi-architecture GNN that fuses the strengths of GCN, GraphSAGE, and GAT to generate interpretable, multi-scale embeddings. Finally, through multi-task training (mortality classification and severity regression), our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on the MIMIC-III dataset, outperforming classical models and single-type GNNs. Ablation studies further show the advantage of integrating static and temporal features in the graph.

By linking patients with analogous clinical profiles and leveraging GNN-based reasoning, this work advances explainable, high-fidelity risk prediction for ICU patients and lays the groundwork for real-time, graph-based decision support in critical care.

2 Related Work

We review foundational advancements in four key domains relevant to our work: (1) Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) for ICU risk modeling, (2) dynamic graph construction in clinical settings, (3) multimodal integration of EHR data, and (4) explainability in graph-based healthcare AI.

2.1 GNNs for ICU Outcome Prediction

GNNs have increasingly been adopted in critical care research for their ability to model inter-patient dependencies and uncover latent relationships across cohorts. Ma?et al.?[3] introduced a dynamic GAT-based model for ICU mortality prediction, achieving up to 1.8% AUC improvement over static graph baselines. Boll?et al.?[4] used patient similarity graphs for heart failure prediction, while Defilippo?et al.?[5] demonstrated GNN utility in automating emergency triage with interpretable outputs. A systematic review by Gao?et al.?[2] consolidates these trends, highlighting GNNs’ edge over traditional models in capturing relational structure. Recent studies have further explored advanced variants such as hypergraphs?[13] and early-warning systems?[12], validating GNN robustness in complex ICU environments.

2.2 Dynamic Graph Construction in Healthcare

Traditional graph-based models often rely on static similarity derived from shared diagnoses or demographics, limiting their responsiveness to clinical progression. To address this, Xu?et al.?[6] proposed a temporal GNN that dynamically updates graph structure based on evolving EHR signals. Our SBSCGM framework builds on this idea, constructing a hybrid patient graph using both static features and real-time vitals. Unlike fixed-topology methods, our approach adaptively redefines connectivity to reflect the most recent patient trajectories, significantly enhancing predictive accuracy as shown in Section?4.

2.3 Multimodal EHR Fusion

ICU patient data is inherently heterogeneous spanning structured variables (e.g., vitals, diagnoses), semi-structured codes, and unstructured text?[1]. Zhou?et al.?[7] proposed PM2F2N, which fuses clinical notes and time-series vitals through co-attention and graph-based correlation modeling. Graph representations are particularly suited for such multimodal fusion, as they allow flexible encoding of various data types within nodes and edges. While our current implementation integrates structured inputs into node features, future extensions may leverage pretrained language models such as BioBERT?[16] and Med-BERT?[17] for textual enrichment, or combine image features using vision-language embeddings?[15, 14].

2.4 Explainability in Clinical GNNs

Interpretability is vital for clinician trust and regulatory acceptance. GATs?[10] offer inherent transparency via attention weights, which quantify the influence of neighboring nodes during prediction. RETAIN?[11] demonstrates how attention can uncover temporal salience in medical histories, while SHAP and other feature attribution tools?[14] are often used post hoc. In HybridGraphMedGNN, we utilize GAT-derived attention to trace peer influence in mortality scoring. Beyond metrics, we conduct error analysis on false positives and negatives to validate alignment with clinical reasoning. Future directions may include integrating GNNExplainer or counterfactual reasoning frameworks to further enhance decision interpretability in safety-critical ICU applications.

3 Methodology

Our proposed framework integrates two key modules: (1) the Similarity-Based Self-Constructing Graph Model (SBSCGM) for dynamic patient graph construction based on EHR-derived similarity metrics, and (2) the HybridGraphMedGNN, a heterogeneous graph neural network designed to perform both mortality classification and severity regression on the constructed graph.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Overview of the SBSCGM framework. Structured EHR data are transformed into feature vectors, pairwise hybrid similarities are computed, and high-similarity links form a dynamic patient graph used as input to the GNN for clinical outcome prediction.

3.1 Patient Similarity Graph Construction (SBSCGM)

We define the ICU cohort as an undirected, weighted graph G=(V,E)G=(V,E)italic_G = ( italic_V , italic_E ), where each node vVv\in Vitalic_v ∈ italic_V represents a patient, and each edge (u,v)E(u,v)\in E( italic_u , italic_v ) ∈ italic_E encodes the clinical similarity between patients uuitalic_u and vvitalic_v. The graph is constructed in a self-supervised fashion using patient-level feature vectors ??v(0)\mathbf{h}^{(0)}_{v}bold_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT derived from multimodal EHRs (see Section?3.2).

To capture heterogeneous clinical signals, we compute a hybrid similarity score as a weighted combination of:

S?(u,v)=α?Sfeat?(u,v)+(1?α)?Sstruct?(u,v),S(u,v)=\alpha\cdot S_{\text{feat}}(u,v)+(1-\alpha)\cdot S_{\text{struct}}(u,v),italic_S ( italic_u , italic_v ) = italic_α ? italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT feat end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u , italic_v ) + ( 1 - italic_α ) ? italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT struct end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u , italic_v ) ,

where Sfeat?(u,v)S_{\text{feat}}(u,v)italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT feat end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u , italic_v ) is the cosine similarity between continuous-valued feature vectors, and Sstruct?(u,v)S_{\text{struct}}(u,v)italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT struct end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u , italic_v ) is the Jaccard index over binary-coded categorical attributes (e.g., diagnoses, procedures). The parameter α[0,1]\alpha\in[0,1]italic_α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] controls the balance; empirically, α=0.7\alpha=0.7italic_α = 0.7 yielded optimal results.

An edge (u,v)(u,v)( italic_u , italic_v ) is created if S?(u,v)>τS(u,v)>\tauitalic_S ( italic_u , italic_v ) > italic_τ, with τ\tauitalic_τ set near the 90th percentile of all pairwise similarities to preserve graph sparsity and clinical relevance. The adjacency matrix AAitalic_A is defined as:

Au?v={S?(u,v),if??S?(u,v)>τ,0,otherwise.A_{uv}=\begin{cases}S(u,v),&\text{if }S(u,v)>\tau,\\ 0,&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { start_ROW start_CELL italic_S ( italic_u , italic_v ) , end_CELL start_CELL if italic_S ( italic_u , italic_v ) > italic_τ , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL otherwise . end_CELL end_ROW

This graph is dynamic and supports updates as patient conditions evolve, though for this study we constructed it once after preprocessing for evaluation.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Illustration of SBSCGM graph construction. Feature vectors derived from structured EHRs are used to compute pairwise hybrid similarity. Edges are added between patients exceeding a similarity threshold, forming a sparse graph for GNN-based analysis.

3.2 Patient Feature Encoding

Each patient node is associated with a feature vector ??v(0)?133\mathbf{h}^{(0)}_{v}\in\mathbb{R}^{133}bold_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 133 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT capturing static and dynamic clinical attributes:

  • ?

    Demographics: Age (normalized), gender, ethnicity, ICU admission type.

  • ?

    Comorbidities and Diagnoses: Binary indicators for top ICD-9 codes and Charlson Comorbidity Index.

  • ?

    Vitals and Labs: Aggregated statistics (mean, min, max) from time-series records of heart rate, blood pressure, glucose, creatinine, and lactate.

  • ?

    Interventions and Medications: Binary flags for high-risk interventions (e.g., ventilation, dialysis), fluid input volume, and major medication categories.

  • ?

    Optional Embeddings: Node2Vec embeddings over patient-diagnosis bipartite graphs to capture latent clinical structure.

Continuous features are min-max normalized to [0,1][0,1][ 0 , 1 ]. Categorical fields are one-hot encoded. Missing values are imputed using cohort-wise means or forward-filling. This preprocessing ensures feature comparability and numerical stability during training.

3.3 HybridGraphMedGNN Architecture

We employ a multi-layer GNN architecture that integrates three complementary types of convolutional layers:

  • ?

    GCN layers?[8]: Capture local neighborhood smoothness via normalized feature averaging.

  • ?

    GraphSAGE layers?[9]: Support inductive reasoning through sampled neighborhood aggregation.

  • ?

    GAT layers?[10]: Learn attention-based weights over neighbors for improved interpretability.

The full network consists of five stacked layers: two GCN, two GraphSAGE, and one multi-head GAT. Each layer applies ReLU activation and batch normalization. All hidden embeddings have a fixed size of 64. The general layer-wise propagation rule is:

??v(l+1)=σ?(uN?(v)w?(u,v)?W(l)???u(l)),\mathbf{h}^{(l+1)}_{v}=\sigma\left(\sum_{u\in N(v)}w(u,v)\cdot W^{(l)}\mathbf{h}^{(l)}_{u}\right),bold_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_l + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_σ ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u ∈ italic_N ( italic_v ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w ( italic_u , italic_v ) ? italic_W start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_l ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_l ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , (1)

where w?(u,v)w(u,v)italic_w ( italic_u , italic_v ) denotes the edge weight (or attention coefficient in GAT), W(l)W^{(l)}italic_W start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_l ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a trainable weight matrix, and σ\sigmaitalic_σ is the activation function.

This architecture enables effective propagation of both local and global signals through the patient similarity graph, capturing higher-order dependencies among ICU trajectories.

3.4 Multi-Task Learning Objective

The final embedding ??v(L)\mathbf{h}_{v}^{(L)}bold_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_L ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for each node is passed to two prediction heads:

  • ?

    Mortality classification: A sigmoid unit predicts y^v[0,1]\hat{y}_{v}\in[0,1]over^ start_ARG italic_y end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] as the probability of in-ICU mortality.

  • ?

    Severity regression: A linear unit outputs c^v?\hat{c}_{v}\in\mathbb{R}over^ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_R reflecting estimated criticalness.

The combined loss function is:

?=λ1??mortality+λ2??criticalness,\mathcal{L}=\lambda_{1}\cdot\mathcal{L}_{\text{mortality}}+\lambda_{2}\cdot\mathcal{L}_{\text{criticalness}},caligraphic_L = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ? caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT mortality end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ? caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT criticalness end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (2)

where ?mortality\mathcal{L}_{\text{mortality}}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT mortality end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the binary cross-entropy loss and ?criticalness\mathcal{L}_{\text{criticalness}}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT criticalness end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the mean squared error (MSE). The weights λ1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and λ2\lambda_{2}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT control the relative contribution of each task. Severity scores are derived from a normalized proxy combining ICU interventions, length of stay, and discharge status, similar to?[17].

This multi-task formulation encourages embeddings that are simultaneously informative for discrete classification and continuous risk stratification yielding improved calibration and clinical utility.

4 Results

4.1 Overall Performance

Table?1 summarizes the comparative performance of all models on the test set. Our proposed HybridGraphMedGNN achieves the highest performance across all evaluation metrics: an AUC-ROC of 0.942, F1-score of 0.874, accuracy of 92.8%, precision of 89.1%, and recall of 85.7%. These results outperform both traditional baselines and single-layer-type GNNs. Notably, the strongest individual GNN variant (GAT-only) achieved 0.915 AUC-ROC and 0.822 F1, while the non-graph MLP baseline achieved only 0.810 AUC-ROC and 0.726 F1. Statistical significance was confirmed via paired ttitalic_t-tests over five random seeds (p<0.01p<0.01italic_p < 0.01).

Table 1: Comparison of models for ICU mortality prediction on the test set.
Model AUC-ROC Accuracy Precision Recall F1
No Graph (MLP) 0.810 78.5% 75.0% 70.4% 72.6%
Logistic Regression 0.799 77.2% 73.1% 68.0% 70.4%
Random Forest 0.825 80.0% 78.9% 65.0% 71.3%
GCN-only 0.902 85.6% 82.3% 78.9% 80.5%
GraphSAGE-only 0.908 86.1% 83.1% 79.5% 81.2%
GAT-only 0.915 86.8% 84.2% 80.3% 82.2%
HybridGraphMedGNN (ours) 0.942 92.8% 89.1% 85.7% 87.4%

Figure?3 presents ROC curves for the top models. HybridGraphMedGNN consistently achieves higher true positive rates across thresholds. At 80% specificity, it reaches nearly 90% sensitivity exceeding all baselines.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: ROC curves comparing GCN, GraphSAGE, GAT, and our HybridGraphMedGNN. Our model demonstrates superior trade-offs between sensitivity and specificity.

The model’s risk regression head yields a Spearman correlation of 0.82 with downstream outcomes, capturing continuous severity trends. High-risk predictions aligned with cases requiring aggressive interventions, validating the clinical relevance of learned scores.

Training, validation, and testing losses are shown in Figure?4, demonstrating consistent convergence and strong generalization.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 4: Loss trajectories for training, validation, and test sets. The model exhibits stable convergence without overfitting.

4.2 Ablation Studies

We conducted two ablation experiments: (1) comparing different patient graph construction strategies, and (2) analyzing the impact of GNN architectural components.

Table?2 presents the results. Constructing the graph using both static and temporal features (hybrid) significantly outperformed single-source graphs. The combined graph achieved 0.942 AUC-ROC and 0.87 F1-score, whereas static-only and temporal-only graphs trailed by 6–9% in both metrics. Figure?5 further visualizes this trend.

Refer to caption
Figure 5: Impact of graph construction strategies on AUC-ROC and F1-score. Our hybrid similarity graph (Combined) clearly outperforms others.

Additionally, comparing GNN layer types reveals the importance of architectural heterogeneity. The hybrid stack (GCN + GraphSAGE + GAT) outperformed any single-type network, leveraging local smoothing, inductive generalization, and attention-based filtering.

Table 2: Ablation results: comparison of graph types and GNN architectures.
Graph Configuration / Model AUC-ROC F1-score
No Graph (MLP) 0.810 0.78
Static Similarity Graph 0.850 0.81
Temporal Similarity Graph 0.860 0.82
Combined Similarity Graph (Ours) 0.942 0.87
GCN-only 0.902 0.805
GraphSAGE-only 0.908 0.812
GAT-only 0.915 0.822
Hybrid (GCN+SAGE+GAT) 0.942 0.874

4.3 Discussion

The integration of graph-based patient modeling substantially improves predictive performance. By propagating risk signals across clinically similar patients, the model captures latent correlations (e.g., rising lactate and respiratory failure) that enhance recall with minimal false positives.

The GAT layer further introduces interpretability: high attention weights aligned with semantically relevant neighbors (e.g., similar interventions or deterioration profiles), emulating clinician-like analogical reasoning.

Figure?6 illustrates the confusion matrix. Misclassifications were primarily edge cases e.g., survivors with late critical intervention (false positives), or atypical deteriorations (false negatives). Nevertheless, the model achieved a balanced true positive and true negative rate.

Refer to caption
Figure 6: Confusion matrix on the test set. Most errors occurred on borderline or atypical cases, highlighting the challenge of ICU prediction.

Limitations: The O?(N2)O(N^{2})italic_O ( italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) cost of similarity-based graph construction can be computationally intensive for very large cohorts. Manual tuning of α\alphaitalic_α and τ\tauitalic_τ also introduces sensitivity. In future work, we plan to explore learned graph construction methods (e.g., self-attention over nodes) and extend our framework to incorporate clinical notes and imaging modalities for deeper multimodal integration.

5 Conclusion and Future Work

We proposed a novel graph-based framework for ICU mortality prediction that dynamically models patient similarity using EHR data. By integrating a self-constructing patient graph (SBSCGM) with a multi-architecture GNN (HybridGraphMedGNN), our approach effectively combines GCN, GraphSAGE, and GAT layers to capture both local and global patient relationships. This design achieved superior AUC-ROC and F1-score compared to traditional ML and standalone GNN baselines.

Clinically, the model offers an interpretable, context-aware early warning system that links each patient to similar historical cases. The hybrid similarity metric and attention mechanisms enhance interpretability and support trustworthiness for deployment in critical care.

Future Directions:

  • ?

    Real-time Monitoring: Extend to online prediction using streaming EHR data, with efficient incremental graph updates and lightweight GNN inference.

  • ?

    External Validation: Evaluate generalizability across datasets like MIMIC-IV or real-world ICU cohorts; adapt similarity thresholds to different clinical distributions.

  • ?

    Multimodal Fusion: Incorporate unstructured data (clinical notes, imaging) into node features or expand to heterogeneous graphs with modality-specific subgraphs.

  • ?

    Explainability: Employ GNNExplainer or contrastive attribution to identify key features and patient-neighbor relationships influencing decisions.

  • ?

    Privacy-Preserving Learning: Develop federated GNN frameworks to train across hospitals without exposing sensitive patient data.

In summary, HybridGraphMedGNN offers a scalable, interpretable, and high-performing solution for ICU risk prediction. With further clinical integration and validation, graph-driven models like ours hold promise for real-time, personalized, and trustworthy AI support in critical care.

References

  • [1] Johnson, A.E.W., Pollard, T.J., Shen, L., Lehman, L.-w.H., Feng, M., Ghassemi, M., Moody, B., Szolovits, P., Celi, L.A., Mark, R.G.: MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database. Scientific Data 3, 160035 (2016).
  • [2] Gao, L., Zhang, Y.: Graph neural networks for electronic health records: A systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics 60, 102315 (2023).
  • [3] Ma, M., Sun, P., Li, Y., Huo, W.: Predicting the risk of mortality in ICU patients based on dynamic graph attention network of patient similarity. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering 20(8), 15326–15344 (2023).
  • [4] Oss?Boll, H., Amirahmadi, A., Soliman, A., Byttner, S., Recamonde-Mendoza, M.: Graph neural networks for heart failure prediction on an EHR-based patient similarity graph. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19742 (2024).
  • [5] Defilippo, A., Veltri, P., Liò, P., Guzzi, P.H.: Leveraging graph neural networks for supporting automatic triage of patients. Scientific Reports 14, 12548 (2024).
  • [6] Xu, J., Liu, W., Wang, F.: Temporal graph neural networks for patient risk prediction. IEEE Transactions on Medical Informatics (2023).
  • [7] Zhang, Y., Zhou, B., Song, K., Sui, X., Zhao, G., Jiang, N., Yuan, X.: Patient multi-view multi-modal feature fusion networks for clinical outcome prediction. In: Findings of EMNLP, pp. 1984–1993 (2022).
  • [8] Kipf, T.N., Welling, M.: Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2017).
  • [9] Hamilton, W.L., Ying, Z., Leskovec, J.: Inductive representation learning on large graphs. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), pp. 1024–1034 (2017).
  • [10] Veli?kovi?, P., Cucurull, G., Casanova, A., Romero, A., Liò, P., Bengio, Y.: Graph attention networks. In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2018).
  • [11] Choi, E., Bahadori, M.T., Schuetz, A., Stewart, W.F., Sun, J.: RETAIN: An interpretable predictive model for healthcare using reverse time attention mechanism. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2016).
  • [12] Zhao, Y., Liu, Y., Guo, W.: Graph-based early warning system for ICU patient deterioration prediction using EHR data. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics (2023).
  • [13] Huang, Z., Chen, W., Liu, X.: Hypergraph convolutional networks for fine-grained ICU patient similarity analysis and risk prediction. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics 26(11), 5552–5562 (2022).
  • [14] Shickel, B., Tighe, P.J., Bihorac, A., Rashidi, P.: Deep EHR: A survey of recent advances in deep learning techniques for electronic health record (EHR) analysis. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 83, 168–185 (2018).
  • [15] Rajkomar, A., et al.: Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records. npj Digital Medicine 1, 18 (2018).
  • [16] Lee, J., Yoon, W., Kim, S., Kim, D., Kim, S., So, C.H., Kang, J.: BioBERT: A pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining. Bioinformatics 36(4), 1234–1240 (2020).
  • [17] Liu, Q., Zhu, Z., Guo, L., Zhang, Z.: Med-BERT: Pretrained contextualized embeddings on large-scale structured electronic health records for disease prediction. NPJ Digital Medicine 4, 86 (2021).
  • [18] Kalyan, K.S., Sangeetha, S.: SEER: A system for early and explainable ICU mortality risk prediction using multimodal temporal data. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 22, 90 (2022).
  • [19] Brown, D., Johnson, A., White, K.: Predicting ICU mortality using graph convolutional networks. In: AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, pp. 234–243 (2022).
节瓜是什么瓜 手脚出汗什么原因 什么叫脑卒中 7月5日是什么星座 伤口感染吃什么消炎药
专场是什么意思 防风通圣颗粒治什么病 伟字五行属什么 beacon什么意思 6月3日什么星座
女性下小腹痛挂什么科 出车前检查的目的是什么 柠檬什么季节成熟 6.24什么星座 前列腺增大钙化是什么意思
结膜炎用什么眼药水效果好 衤字旁的字与什么有关 小孩子睡觉流口水是什么原因 翘首企盼是什么意思 国印贵人是什么意思
aml是什么病huizhijixie.com 床垫选什么材质的好zsyouku.com 梦见自己光脚走路是什么意思hanqikai.com 蓝莓泡酒有什么功效hcv8jop6ns1r.cn 拉垮什么意思jasonfriends.com
三情六欲是什么意思hcv8jop5ns2r.cn 绿色裤子配什么上衣imcecn.com 射精是什么意思hcv9jop4ns1r.cn 落井下石是什么意思hcv7jop9ns1r.cn 颈管细胞有是什么意思hcv9jop6ns9r.cn
巨细胞病毒抗体阳性是什么意思hcv8jop0ns5r.cn 口苦口干是什么原因造成的hcv8jop7ns5r.cn 骨强度不足是什么原因hcv9jop5ns3r.cn 四海是什么意思hcv9jop8ns3r.cn 何曾是什么意思hcv7jop5ns0r.cn
鸡头米是什么东西hcv7jop6ns8r.cn 多字五行属什么hcv7jop5ns5r.cn 回族为什么不能吃猪肉hcv7jop7ns2r.cn 11.22是什么星座weuuu.com 柠檬有什么功效和作用hcv8jop1ns1r.cn
百度