subject

Soft Computing

Soft Computing: explore 2 source-linked works published from 2026 to 2026, with original documents and citations.

This collection is a preview while coverage and quality are evaluated.

Coverage and selection

Includes records with this source-supplied label or an explicit phrase match in their metadata. Matches indicate a mention, not proof that a paper uses a method or tests a material. Source versions are consolidated by DOI.

Sources: pubmed. Collection updated 2026-09-22. Counts describe this index, not the complete source archives.

PubMed2026

Improving insurance deduction identification: a hybrid artificial intelligence model using machine learning and expert systems.

PURPOSE: Financial challenges in healthcare systems worldwide, especially in low- and middle-income countries like Iran, have increased hospitals' reliance on insurance reimbursements. Unrecognized insurance deductions often cause severe financial shortages, making efficient deduction management crucial. This study aimed to design a hybrid intelligent system for identifying and predicting insurance deductions by combining machine learning and expert system frameworks. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A mixed-methods design was applied in four stages. First, a scoping review identified the causes and patterns of insurance deductions. Second, interviews with 15 insurance experts produced a validated checklist and a dataset from inpatient billing records. Third, using the CRISP-DM methodology, machine learning algorithms were developed and tested in SPSS Modeler alongside a fuzzy expert system developed in MATLAB. Finally, the model was validated using the holdout method. FINDINGS: Four categories of deduction drivers were identified: service provision, registration errors, document submission issues, and revenue conversion processes. The CHAID decision tree outperformed other algorithms with a 99% precision rate and the lowest Mean Absolute Error (9.43). A brief assessment of potential overfitting was conducted to ensure that the CHAID model's high accuracy was interpreted cautiously and supported by the validation results. The fuzzy expert system with validated rules was adaptable for deduction classification, especially for cases unsuitable for quantitative modeling. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The hybrid model improves detection and prevention of deductions, offering actionable insights for hospital administrators, insurers, and policymakers. Its implementation can enhance hospital information systems, streamline claims processing, and optimize revenue management amid financial constraints.

Machine Learning↗

PubMed2026

Machine learning vs. traditional methods for predicting postoperative cardiac complications after non-cardiac surgery: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate prediction of peri-operative cardiac complications is critical to optimise pre-operative decision-making. Traditional risk prediction scores, such as the Revised Cardiac Risk Index, show only modest discrimination. Machine learning can model complex, non-linear relationships but their predictive performance compared with traditional scores remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary outcome was postoperative adverse cardiac events following non-cardiac surgery. Prediction models were assessed relative to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index. As many studies evaluated multiple versions of each model type, the highest performing ('best version') and lowest performing ('worst version') results were analysed. Models were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: Thirteen studies evaluating 54 models and 927,113 patients were included. Machine learning approaches generally outperformed traditional risk scores. Automated machine learning ranked highest (SUCRA 96.6) showed the greatest improvement in the best version analysis (mean difference (MD) 0.28 (95%CrI 0.16-0.40)) and remained superior in the sensitivity analysis (MD 0.30 (95%CrI 0.14-0.45)). Gradient boosting models showed superior performance over the Revised Cardiac Risk Index across analysis (best version: MD 0.20 (95%CrI 0.14-0.26), worst version: MD 0.18 (95%CrI 0.12-0.25), SUCRA 82.4). The Gupta Perioperative Risk for Myocardial Infarction or Cardiac Arrest score outperformed the Revised Cardiac Risk Index in the best version analysis (MD 0.16 (95%CrI 0.01-0.32)). Between-study heterogeneity was low. None of the included studies externally validated their machine learning models and only six were judged to be at low risk of bias. DISCUSSION: Most machine learning models showed better discrimination than traditional risk scores, with automated machine learning and gradient boosting models ranking highest. However, study quality, calibration reporting and absence of external validation limit immediate clinical adoption. Prospective, multicentre evaluation is required before integration of these models into peri-operative practice.

Humans↗

Compare source metadata on this page

Work	Published	Source identifier	Source
Improving insurance deduction identification: a hybrid artificial intelligence model using machine learning and expert systems.	2026-09-02	PMID 42417705	pubmed
Machine learning vs. traditional methods for predicting postoperative cardiac complications after non-cardiac surgery: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.	2026-06-22	PMID 42325156	pubmed

These are bibliographic comparisons, not experimental rankings. Follow the original document for methods and conditions.