MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1855722232 · doi:10.1186/s12911-015-0162-6

Electronic medical record-based multicondition models to predict the risk of 30 day readmission or death among adult medicine patients: validation and comparison to existing models

2015· article· en· W1855722232 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Public Health ServiceAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterCommonwealth Fund
KeywordsMedicineMedicaidMedical recordHealth informaticsEmergency medicineElectronic medical recordDemographicsMedical emergencyInternal medicineHealth carePublic healthDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in using prediction models to identify patients at risk of readmission or death after hospital discharge, but existing models have significant limitations. Electronic medical record (EMR) based models that can be used to predict risk on multiple disease conditions among a wide range of patient demographics early in the hospitalization are needed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the degree to which EMR-based risk models for 30-day readmission or mortality accurately identify high risk patients and to compare these models with published claims-based models. METHODS: Data were analyzed from all consecutive adult patients admitted to internal medicine services at 7 large hospitals belonging to 3 health systems in Dallas/Fort Worth between November 2009 and October 2010 and split randomly into derivation and validation cohorts. Performance of the model was evaluated against the Canadian LACE mortality or readmission model and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Wide Readmission model. RESULTS: Among the 39,604 adults hospitalized for a broad range of medical reasons, 2.8% of patients died, 12.7% were readmitted, and 14.7% were readmitted or died within 30 days after discharge. The electronic multicondition models for the composite outcome of 30-day mortality or readmission had good discrimination using data available within 24 h of admission (C statistic 0.69; 95% CI, 0.68-0.70), or at discharge (0.71; 95% CI, 0.70-0.72), and were significantly better than the LACE model (0.65; 95% CI, 0.64-0.66; P =0.02) with significant NRI (0.16) and IDI (0.039, 95% CI, 0.035-0.044). The electronic multicondition model for 30-day readmission alone had good discrimination using data available within 24 h of admission (C statistic 0.66; 95% CI, 0.65-0.67) or at discharge (0.68; 95% CI, 0.67-0.69), and performed significantly better than the CMS model (0.61; 95% CI, 0.59-0.62; P < 0.01) with significant NRI (0.20) and IDI (0.037, 95% CI, 0.033-0.041). CONCLUSIONS: A new electronic multicondition model based on information derived from the EMR predicted mortality and readmission at 30 days, and was superior to previously published claims-based models.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.268 · 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