Development of Pediatric Comorbidity Prediction Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a comorbidity model for children that can be used with hospital discharge administrative databases. DESIGN: Retrospective study using administrative data obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database and the Deaths File to develop a logistic regression model. Hosmer-Lemeshow chi2 test was used to examine model fit. The C statistic was used to assess model discrimination. Bootstrapping was used to determine the stability of regression coefficients. SETTING: We used linked administrative databases to compile 339,077 hospital discharge abstracts from April 1, 1991, through March 31, 2002. PARTICIPANTS: Children between ages 1 and 14 years in Ontario, Canada. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Death within 1 year of hospital discharge. RESULTS: The 27-variable pediatric comorbidity model predicted 1-year mortality with a C statistic of 0.83 in the Ontario data set from which it was derived. The presence of brain cancer (odds ratio, 76.38 [95% confidence interval, 53.40-109.27]) at hospital admission was the strongest predictor, followed by diabetes insipidus (odds ratio, 39.23 [95% confidence interval, 20.75-74.17]). CONCLUSION: Using clinical judgment and empirical modeling strategies, we were able to identify 27 diagnoses highly predictive of death for children between 1 and 14 years of age within 1 year of hospital discharge.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".