Back

A Supervised Text-Embedded Transformer Matching Model to Detect Fall Injuries in Medicare Data

Kane, M.; Greene, E. J.; Esserman, D.; Latham, N. K.; Min, L. C.; Ganz, D. A.

2026-07-31 geriatric medicine
10.64898/2026.07.29.26359258 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objective: To develop and validate a supervised text-embedded transformer matching model to identify fall injuries in Medicare data, and evaluate the model's performance -- alongside a validated rule-based algorithm-- against "ground truth" from an external reference standard (self-reported fall injuries leading to medical attention). Materials and Methods: Text embeddings of ICD-10-CM and CPT codes in Medicare claims/encounters from participants in the Strategies to Reduce Injuries and Develop Confidence in Elders (STRIDE) trial served as model inputs. Trained on annotated claims/encounters occurring within +/- one month of self-reported fall injuries leading to medical attention, the transformer model generated a continuous 0-1 probability that each claim/encounter was for a fall injury. The model was then applied to all claims/encounters in STRIDE and compared alongside the rule-based algorithm to the external reference standard. Results: The model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of > 0.96 against annotated claims/encounters in 9 out of 10 holdout folds and 0.85 in the remaining fold. In the full STRIDE dataset, the model achieved a peak AUC of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.84-0.87) against the external reference standard, with results comparable to the rule-based algorithm. Discussion: Relative to rule-based approaches, which typically generate binary outcomes, the continuous event probability generated by the transformer model could support clinical endpoint adjudication, with high-probability predictions treated as events, moderate-probability predictions being adjudicated, and low-probability predictions treated as non-events. Conclusion: A text-embedded transformer model identified fall injuries with comparable accuracy to a rule-based algorithm, demonstrating "proof of concept" for use in endpoint adjudication.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.