MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1480887189

LACE+ index: extension of a validated index to predict early death or urgent readmission after hospital discharge using administrative data.

2012· article· en· W1480887189 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carl van Walraven, Jenna Wong, Alan J. Forster

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStatisticIndex (typography)Marital statusEmergency medicineComorbidityNational Death IndexMedical emergencyConfidence intervalStatisticsInternal medicineHazard ratioPopulationEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Death or urgent readmission after hospital discharge is a common adverse event that can be used to compare outcomes of care between institutions. To accurately adjust for risk and to allow for interhospital comparisons of readmission rates, we used administrative data to derive and internally validate an extension of the LACE index, a previously validated index for 30-day death or urgent readmission. METHODS: We randomly selected 500 000 medical and surgical patients discharged to the community from any Ontario hospital between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2009. We derived a logistic regression model on 250 000 randomly selected patients from this group and modified the final model into an index scoring system, the LACE+ index. We internally validated the LACE+ index using data from the remaining 250 000 patients and compared its performance with that of the original LACE index. RESULTS: Within 30 days of discharge to the community, 33 825 (6.8%) of the patients had died or had been urgently readmitted. In addition to the variables included in the LACE index (length of stay in hospital [L], acuity of admission [A], comorbidity [C] and emergency department utilization in the 6 months before admission [E]), the LACE+ index incorporated patient age and sex, teaching status of the discharge hospital, acute diagnoses and procedures performed during the index admission, number of days on alternative level of care during the index admission, and number of elective and urgent admissions to hospital in the year before the index admission. The LACE+ index was highly discriminative (C statistic 0.771, 95% confidence interval 0.767-0.775), was well calibrated across most of its range of scores and had a model performance that exceeded that of the LACE index. INTERPRETATION: The LACE+ index can be used to predict the risk of postdischarge death or urgent readmission on the basis of administrative data for the Ontario population. Its performance exceeds that of the LACE index, and it allows analysts to accurately estimate the risk of important postdischarge outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207