External validation of A Web-Based Prognostic Tool for Predicting Survival for Patients in Hospice Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prognostat is an interactive Web-based prognostic tool for estimating hospice patient survival based on a patient's Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) score, age, gender, and cancer status. The tool was developed using data from 5,893 palliative care patients, which was collected at the Victoria Hospice in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, beginning in 1994. This study externally validates Prognostat with a retrospective cohort of 590 hospice patients at LifePath Hospice and Palliative Care in Florida, USA. The criteria used to evaluate the prognostic performance were the Brier score, area under the receiver operating curve, discrimination slope, and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. Though the Kaplan-Meier curves show each PPS level to be distinct and significantly different, the findings reveal low agreement between observed survival in our cohort of patients and survival predicted by the prognostic tool. Before developing a new prognostic model, researchers are encouraged to update survival estimates obtained using Prognostat with the information from their cohort of patients. If it is to be useful to patients and clinicians, Prognostat needs to explicitly report patient risk scores and estimates of baseline survival.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".