Back

Prediction of Heart Failure based on Multimodal Data from MIMIC-IV

Lutz, A.; Hellmann, F.; Andre, E.

2026-08-18 health informatics
10.64898/2026.08.17.26360588 medRxiv
Show abstract

Heart failure (HF) affects over 64 million people worldwide and remains a leading cause of cardiovascular mortality. Early identification of patients at risk is essential for timely treatment and to support hospital and primary care physicians. This study compares XGBoost and a Transformer- based bidirectional cross-attention model using multimodal data to assess whether deep learning (DL) approaches can outperform classical machine learning (ML) methods for early HF prediction. We identified HF and non-HF patients from the MIMIC-IV database using ICD-9/10 codes, supplemented by clinical evidence from laboratory results, radiology, and discharge notes. Furthermore, we defined a 48-hour prediction window prior to the first clinical evidence of HF. Structured features were engineered from rolling-window statistics and clinical thresholds. Both XGBoost and Transformer models were trained on multimodal data and compared through an ablation study. Finally, we developed a dashboard using a small set of laboratory and medication features to deliver a 48- hour HF risk estimate, aiding clinician diagnosis. Multimodal models outperformed single-modality models across both architectures. The multimodal XGBoost model achieved the highest performance (F1 of 0. 8773 and PR-AUC of 0.9402), while the multimodal Transformer achieved slightly lower performance (F1 0.8635, PR-AUC 0.9209). Structured data contributed most to XGBoost (PR-AUC of 0.9163), whereas clinical notes were better captured by the Transformer (PR- AUC of 0.8220). Explainable dashboards further enhance transparency and usability by delivering quantitative 48-hour risk estimates from minimal features. This demonstrates, in this setting, that traditional ML can outperform DL models such as Transformers on tabular-dominated, multimodal clinical prediction tasks while preserving interpretability, underscoring decision-support systems potential to aid timely diagnosis.

Matching journals

The top 3 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.