Literature DB >> 17568333

Assessing the calibration of mortality benchmarks in critical care: The Hosmer-Lemeshow test revisited.

Andrew A Kramer1, Jack E Zimmerman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the Hosmer-Lemeshow test's sensitivity in evaluating the calibration of models predicting hospital mortality in large critical care populations.
DESIGN: Simulation study.
SETTING: Intensive care unit databases used for predictive modeling. PATIENTS: Data sets were simulated representing the approximate number of patients used in earlier versions of critical care predictive models (n = 5,000 and 10,000) and more recent predictive models (n = 50,000). Each patient had a hospital mortality probability generated as a function of 23 risk variables.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data sets of 5,000, 10,000, and 50,000 patients were replicated 1,000 times. Logistic regression models were evaluated for each simulated data set. This process was initially carried out under conditions of perfect fit (observed mortality = predicted mortality; standardized mortality ratio = 1.000) and repeated with an observed mortality that differed slightly (0.4%) from predicted mortality. Under conditions of perfect fit, the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was not influenced by the number of patients in the data set. In situations where there was a slight deviation from perfect fit, the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was sensitive to sample size. For populations of 5,000 patients, 10% of the Hosmer-Lemeshow tests were significant at p < .05, whereas for 10,000 patients 34% of the Hosmer-Lemeshow tests were significant at p < .05. When the number of patients matched contemporary studies (i.e., 50,000 patients), the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was statistically significant in 100% of the models.
CONCLUSIONS: Caution should be used in interpreting the calibration of predictive models developed using a smaller data set when applied to larger numbers of patients. A significant Hosmer-Lemeshow test does not necessarily mean that a predictive model is not useful or suspect. While decisions concerning a mortality model's suitability should include the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, additional information needs to be taken into consideration. This includes the overall number of patients, the observed and predicted probabilities within each decile, and adjunct measures of model calibration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17568333     DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000275267.64078.B0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  267 in total

1.  Comparison of APACHE III, APACHE IV, SAPS 3, and MPM0III and influence of resuscitation status on model performance.

Authors:  Mark T Keegan; Ognjen Gajic; Bekele Afessa
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Disparities in routine breast cancer screening for Medicaid managed care members with a work-limiting disability.

Authors:  Sharada Weir; Heather E Posner; Jianying Zhang; Whitney C Jones; Georgianna Willis; Jeffrey D Baxter; Robin E Clark
Journal:  Medicare Medicaid Res Rev       Date:  2011-11-04

3.  Pancreatectomy risk calculator: an ACS-NSQIP resource.

Authors:  Purvi Parikh; Mira Shiloach; Mark E Cohen; Karl Y Bilimoria; Clifford Y Ko; Bruce L Hall; Henry A Pitt
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.647

4.  Utilization and effectiveness of medical rehabilitation in foreign nationals residing in Germany.

Authors:  Patrick Brzoska; Sven Voigtländer; Jacob Spallek; Oliver Razum
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 8.082

5.  An Evaluation of the Influence of Body Mass Index on Severity Scoring.

Authors:  Rodrigo Octavio Deliberato; Ary Serpa Neto; Matthieu Komorowski; David J Stone; Stephanie Q Ko; Lucas Bulgarelli; Carolina Rodrigues Ponzoni; Renato Carneiro de Freitas Chaves; Leo Anthony Celi; Alistair E W Johnson
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  Relationship between Leapfrog Safe Practices Survey and outcomes in trauma.

Authors:  Laurent G Glance; Andrew W Dick; Turner M Osler; J Wayne Meredith; Patricia W Stone; Yue Li; Dana B Mukamel
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2011-10

7.  Increases in mortality, length of stay, and cost associated with hospital-acquired infections in trauma patients.

Authors:  Laurent G Glance; Pat W Stone; Dana B Mukamel; Andrew W Dick
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2011-03-21

8.  Performance of PRISM (Pediatric Risk of Mortality) score and PIM (Pediatric Index of Mortality) score in a tertiary care pediatric ICU.

Authors:  Roshani N Taori; Keya R Lahiri; Milind S Tullu
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 1.967

9.  Dynamic data during hypotensive episode improves mortality predictions among patients with sepsis and hypotension.

Authors:  Louis Mayaud; Peggy S Lai; Gari D Clifford; Lionel Tarassenko; Leo Anthony Celi; Djillali Annane
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 7.598

10.  Development and external validation study of a melanoma risk prediction model incorporating clinically assessed naevi and solar lentigines.

Authors:  K Vuong; B K Armstrong; M Drummond; J L Hopper; J H Barrett; J R Davies; D T Bishop; J Newton-Bishop; J F Aitken; G G Giles; H Schmid; M A Jenkins; G J Mann; K McGeechan; A E Cust
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2019-09-22       Impact factor: 9.302

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.