Papers › RETAIN: An Interpretable Predictive Model for Healthcare using Reverse Time Attention Mechanism
RETAIN: An Interpretable Predictive Model for Healthcare using Reverse Time Attention Mechanism
Edward Choi, Mohammad Taha Bahadori, Joshua A. Kulas, Andy Schuetz, Walter F. Stewart, Jimeng Sun
Accuracy and interpretability are two dominant features of successful predictive models. Typically, a choice must be made in favor of complex black box models such as recurrent neural networks (RNN) for accuracy versus less accurate but more interpretable traditional models such as logistic regression. This tradeoff poses challenges in medicine where both accuracy and interpretability are important. We addressed this challenge by developing the REverse Time AttentIoN model (RETAIN) for application to Electronic Health Records (EHR) data. RETAIN achieves high accuracy while remaining clinically interpretable and is based on a two-level neural attention model that detects influential past visits and significant clinical variables within those visits (e.g. key diagnoses). RETAIN mimics physician practice by attending the EHR data in a reverse time order so that recent clinical visits are likely to receive higher attention. RETAIN was tested on a large health system EHR dataset with 14 million visits completed by 263K patients over an 8 year period and demonstrated predictive accuracy and computational scalability comparable to state-of-the-art methods such as RNN, and ease of interpretability comparable to traditional models.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | AUC (ABPA) | 0.685 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | AUC (Aspergillus) | 0.641 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | AUC (Diabetes) | 0.764 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | AUC (E. Coli) | 0.697 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | AUC (I. Obstruction) | 0.578 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | AUC (K. Pneumonia) | 0.715 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Disease Trajectory Forecasting | UK CF trust | RETAIN | I. Obstruction | 0.578 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections