Comparing Single-Hospital and National Models to Predict 30-Day Inpatient Mortality.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of General Internal Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1007/s11606-024-09315-3
Steven Cogill, Kent Heberer, Amit Kaushal, Daniel Fang, Jennifer Lee
{"title":"Comparing Single-Hospital and National Models to Predict 30-Day Inpatient Mortality.","authors":"Steven Cogill, Kent Heberer, Amit Kaushal, Daniel Fang, Jennifer Lee","doi":"10.1007/s11606-024-09315-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning have facilitated the creation of mortality prediction models which are increasingly used to assess quality of care and inform clinical practice. One open question is whether a hospital should utilize a mortality model trained from a diverse nationwide dataset or use a model developed primarily from their local hospital data.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare performance of a single-hospital, 30-day all-cause mortality model against an established national benchmark on the task of mortality prediction.</p><p><strong>Design/participants: </strong>We developed a single-hospital mortality prediction model using 9975 consecutive inpatient admissions at the Department of Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System from July 26, 2018, to September 30, 2021, and compared performance against an established national model with similar features.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Both the single-hospital model and the national model placed each patient in one of five prediction bins: < 2.5%, 2.5-5%, 5-10%, 10-30%, and ≥ 30% risks of 30-day mortality. Evaluation metrics included receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and balanced accuracy. Final comparisons were made between the single-hospital model trained on the full training set and the national model for both metrics and prediction overlap.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>With sufficiently large training sets of 2720 or greater inpatient admissions, there was no statistically significant difference between the performances of the national model (ROC AUC 0.89, 95%CI [0.858, 0.919]) and single-hospital model (ROC AUC 0.878, 95%CI [0.84, 0.912]). For the 89 mortality events in the test set, the single-hospital model agreed with the national model risk assessment or an adjacent risk assessment in 92.1% of the encounters.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A single-hospital inpatient mortality prediction model can achieve performance comparable to a national model when evaluated on a single-hospital population, given sufficient sample size.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":"40 4","pages":"803-810"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11914419/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-09315-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning have facilitated the creation of mortality prediction models which are increasingly used to assess quality of care and inform clinical practice. One open question is whether a hospital should utilize a mortality model trained from a diverse nationwide dataset or use a model developed primarily from their local hospital data.

Objective: To compare performance of a single-hospital, 30-day all-cause mortality model against an established national benchmark on the task of mortality prediction.

Design/participants: We developed a single-hospital mortality prediction model using 9975 consecutive inpatient admissions at the Department of Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System from July 26, 2018, to September 30, 2021, and compared performance against an established national model with similar features.

Main measures: Both the single-hospital model and the national model placed each patient in one of five prediction bins: < 2.5%, 2.5-5%, 5-10%, 10-30%, and ≥ 30% risks of 30-day mortality. Evaluation metrics included receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and balanced accuracy. Final comparisons were made between the single-hospital model trained on the full training set and the national model for both metrics and prediction overlap.

Key results: With sufficiently large training sets of 2720 or greater inpatient admissions, there was no statistically significant difference between the performances of the national model (ROC AUC 0.89, 95%CI [0.858, 0.919]) and single-hospital model (ROC AUC 0.878, 95%CI [0.84, 0.912]). For the 89 mortality events in the test set, the single-hospital model agreed with the national model risk assessment or an adjacent risk assessment in 92.1% of the encounters.

Conclusions: A single-hospital inpatient mortality prediction model can achieve performance comparable to a national model when evaluated on a single-hospital population, given sufficient sample size.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Journal of General Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
749
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Internal Medicine is the official journal of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It promotes improved patient care, research, and education in primary care, general internal medicine, and hospital medicine. Its articles focus on topics such as clinical medicine, epidemiology, prevention, health care delivery, curriculum development, and numerous other non-traditional themes, in addition to classic clinical research on problems in internal medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信