GENERATIVE AI FOR TEN-YEAR PREDICTION OF MULTIMORBIDITY: A METHODOLOGICAL STUDY BASED ON PUBLICLY AVAILABLE AND SYNTHETIC DATA

Keywords: generative artificial intelligence; multimorbidity; predictive modeling; electronic health records; PheCode; calibration; decision curve analysis; fairness.

Abstract


Introduction/Aim: The aim of the work is to present a methodological framework for a ten-year prediction of multimorbidity using a generative, sequential model based on transformer architecture, with full reliance on publicly available and synthetic data, without processing identifiable patient data.

Methods: A methodological study was conducted with primary training and evaluation on the Synthea synthetic cohort (≥100,000 records), with technical checks on MIMIC-III (de-identified real intensive care data). Outcomes (≥1,000) were defined by mapping ICD-10/ICD-10-CM codes to PheCode categories. The model is a transformer with multitask outputs (one for each target) and time embeddings, with evaluation of discrimination (AUPRC, AUROC), calibration (Brier, intercept/slope) and clinical utility (Decision Curve Analysis). Sensitivity analyzes and basic fairness checks (gender, age) were conducted.

Results: The model achieved the best results in cardiometabolic and oncological domains, moderate in respiratory/renal, and more modest in mental/infectious outcomes. Calibration was good in the intermediate risk ranges; DCA showed a positive net benefit at thresholds relevant for opportunistic screening (≈5–15% 10-year risk). Sensitivity analyzes confirmed the stability of ranking performance across changes in rarity thresholds and history length, with no evidence of significant label leakage.

Conclusion: A reproducible and ethically acceptable approach to long-term multi-disease risk prediction using a generative transformer on public/synthetic sets is presented. This "health barometer" can support triage and personalized prevention, while recommending mandatory external validation, local re-calibration and equity monitoring prior to clinical application.

 

References

1. Shmatko A, Jung AW, Gerstung M. Learning the natural history of human disease with generative transformers. Nature. 2025 Sep 17. Doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09529-3
2. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Brindle P. Development and validation of QRISK3 risk prediction algorithms. BMJ. 2017;357:j2099. Doi:10.1136/bmj.j2099
3. Li Y, Rao S, Solares JRA, et al. BEHRT: Transformer for Electronic Health Records. Sci Rep. 2020;10:7155. Doi:10.1038/s41598-020-62922-y
4. Sudlow C, Gallacher J, Allen N, et al. UK Biobank: An Open Access Resource… PLoS Med. 2015;12(3):e1001779. Doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001779
5. Johnson AEW, Pollard TJ, Shen L, et al. MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database. Sci Data. 2016;3:160035. Doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.35
6. Walonoski J, Kramer M, Nichols J, et al. Synthea: generating synthetic patients and HER. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(3):230-238. Doi:10.1093/jamia/ocx079
7. Bouderhem R. Shaping the future of AI in healthcare through ethics and governance. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2024;11:416. Doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02894-w
8. Collins GS, Moons KGM, Dhiman P, et al. TRIPOD+AI statement. BMJ. 2024;385:e078378. Doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-078378
9. Wu P, Gifford A, Meng X, et al. Mapping ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM Codes to Phecodes. JMIR Med Inform. 2019;7(4):e14325. Doi:10.2196/14325
10. Saito T, Rehmsmeier M. The Precision-Recall Plot Is More Informative than the ROC Plot... PLOS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0118432. Doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118432
11. Richardson E, Trevizani R, Greenbaum JA, et al. The ROC curve accurately assesses unbalanced datasets. Patterns (NY). 2024;5(6):100994. Doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.100994
12. Van Calster B, McLernon DJ, van Smeden M, et al. Calibration: the Achilles heel of predictive analytics. BMC Med. 2019;17:230. Doi:10.1186/s12916-019-1466-7
13. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis. Med Decis Making. 2006;26(6):565-574 Doi:10.1177/0272989X06295361
14. Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, Mullainathan S. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science. 2019;366(6464):447-453. Doi:10.1126/science.aax2342
15. Liu M, Cruz Rivera S, Moher D, et al. A translational perspective towards clinical AI fairness. NPJ Digit Med. 2023;6:172. Doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00918-4
16. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25:44-56. Doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7
Published
2026/07/04
Section
Original Scientific Paper