Literature DB >> 8565539

Factors affecting the performance of the models in the Mortality Probability Model II system and strategies of customization: a simulation study.

B P Zhu1, S Lemeshow, D W Hosmer, J Klar, J Avrunin, D Teres.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) size on the performance of the Mortality Probability Model II system for use in quality assessment, and to examine the ability of model customization to produce accurate estimates of hospital mortality to characterize patients by severity of illness for clinical trials.
DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of model performance, using retrospective data.
SETTING: Data for the simulation were assembled from six adult medical and surgical ICUs in Massachusetts and New York. PATIENTS: Consecutive admissions (n = 4,224) to the Massachusetts and New York ICUs were studied. The mortality rate in the database was 18.7%.
INTERVENTIONS: A computer simulation of several different hospital mortality rates and ICU sample sizes, using a multicenter database of consecutive ICU admissions, was utilized. We simulated 20 different mortality rates by randomly changing the outcomes at hospital discharge from "survived" to "deceased" and from "deceased" to "survived". Four sample size simulations used 75%, 50%, 25%, and 10% of the database. Ten replications of each mortality rate and samples size were constructed, and model calibration and discrimination were assessed for each replication. Model coefficients were customized, using logistic regression.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Vital status at hospital discharge was the outcome measure among the ICU patient population. Model performance was assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow C statistic for calibration, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for discrimination. Goodness-of-fit tests and receiver operating characteristic curve areas demonstrated that the models were sensitive to differences in hospital mortality, indicating that they are useful quality assurance tools. Goodness-of-fit tests were more sensitive than the receiver operating characteristic curve areas. The further the hospital mortality rate diverged from the original rate, the worse the performance of the model. Sample size had an impact on these results. The smaller the sample size, the less likely the model was to perform poorly. Model coefficients were successfully customized to demonstrate that improved model performance can be achieved when necessary for clinical trial stratification.
CONCLUSION: Mortality Probability Model II models can be used to assess quality of care in ICUs, but the size of the sample should be considered when assessing calibration and discrimination.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8565539     DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199601000-00011

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


  23 in total

1.  Prediction of long-term mortality in ICU patients: model validation and assessing the effect of using in-hospital versus long-term mortality on benchmarking.

Authors:  Sylvia Brinkman; Ameen Abu-Hanna; Evert de Jonge; Nicolette F de Keizer
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Validation of four prognostic scores in patients with cancer admitted to Brazilian intensive care units: results from a prospective multicenter study.

Authors:  Márcio Soares; Ulisses V A Silva; José M M Teles; Eliézer Silva; Pedro Caruso; Suzana M A Lobo; Felipe Dal Pizzol; Luciano P Azevedo; Frederico B de Carvalho; Jorge I F Salluh
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  The performance of SAPS II in a cohort of patients admitted to 99 Italian ICUs: results from GiViTI. Gruppo Italiano per la Valutazione degli interventi in Terapia Intensiva.

Authors:  G Apolone; G Bertolini; R D'Amico; G Iapichino; A Cattaneo; G De Salvo; R M Melotti
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  SAPS II revisited.

Authors:  Philippe Aegerter; Ariane Boumendil; Aurélia Retbi; Etienne Minvielle; Benoit Dervaux; Bertrand Guidet
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-01-28       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Electronic Health Record Mortality Prediction Model for Targeted Palliative Care Among Hospitalized Medical Patients: a Pilot Quasi-experimental Study.

Authors:  Katherine R Courtright; Corey Chivers; Michael Becker; Susan H Regli; Linnea C Pepper; Michael E Draugelis; Nina R O'Connor
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  External validation of the SAPS II, APACHE II and APACHE III prognostic models in South England: a multicentre study.

Authors:  Dieter H Beck; Gary B Smith; John V Pappachan; Brian Millar
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2003-01-18       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Hospital mortality is associated with ICU admission time.

Authors:  Hans A J M Kuijsten; Sylvia Brinkman; Iwan A Meynaar; Peter E Spronk; Johan I van der Spoel; Rob J Bosman; Nicolette F de Keizer; Ameen Abu-Hanna; Dylan W de Lange
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  Austrian validation and customization of the SAPS 3 Admission Score.

Authors:  Barbara Metnitz; Eva Schaden; Rui Moreno; Jean-Roger Le Gall; Peter Bauer; Philipp G H Metnitz
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2008-10-10       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Probability of mortality of critically ill cancer patients at 72 h of intensive care unit (ICU) management.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Groeger; Jill Glassman; David M Nierman; Susannah Kish Wallace; Kristen Price; David Horak; David Landsberg
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2003-08-05       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  Stratification of the severity of critically ill patients with classification trees.

Authors:  Javier Trujillano; Mariona Badia; Luis Serviá; Jaume March; Angel Rodriguez-Pozo
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.