Loading…

A Comparison of Models Predicting One-Year Mortality at Time of Admission

Hospitalization provides an opportunity to address end-of-life care (EoLC) preferences if patients at risk of death can be accurately identified while in the hospital. The modified Hospital One-Year Mortality Risk (mHOMR) uses demographic and admission data in a logistic regression algorithm to iden...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of pain and symptom management 2022-03, Vol.63 (3), p.e287-e293
Main Authors: Pierce, Robert P., Raithel, Seth, Brandt, Lea, Clary, Kevin W., Craig, Kevin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3
container_end_page e293
container_issue 3
container_start_page e287
container_title Journal of pain and symptom management
container_volume 63
creator Pierce, Robert P.
Raithel, Seth
Brandt, Lea
Clary, Kevin W.
Craig, Kevin
description Hospitalization provides an opportunity to address end-of-life care (EoLC) preferences if patients at risk of death can be accurately identified while in the hospital. The modified Hospital One-Year Mortality Risk (mHOMR) uses demographic and admission data in a logistic regression algorithm to identify patients at risk of death one year from admission. This project sought to validate mHOMR and identify superior models. The mHOMR model was validated using historical data from an academic health system. Alternative logistic regression and random forest (RF) models were developed using the same variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and precision recall curves were developed, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were compared over a range of model thresholds. The RF model demonstrated higher area under the ROC curve (0.950, 95% CI 0.947 – 0.954) as compared to the logistic regression models (0.818 [95% CI 0.812 – 0.825] and 0.841 [95% CI 0.836 – 0.847]). Area under the precision recall curve was higher with the random forest model compared to the logistic regression models (0.863 vs. 0.458 and 0.494, respectively). Across a range of thresholds, the RF model demonstrated superior sensitivity, equivalent specificity, and higher positive and negative predictive values. A machine learning RF model, using common demographic and utilization data available on hospital admission, identified inpatients at risk of death more effectively than logistic regression models using the same variables. Machine learning models have promise for identifying admitted patients with elevated one-year mortality risk, increasing opportunities to prompt discussion of EoLC preferences.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.11.006
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2604026650</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0885392421006394</els_id><sourcerecordid>2604026650</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkMFO3DAQhi1EVbbQV6iCuPSS1GMnTnxcrShFooIDHDhZjj2pHCX2Ymcr7dvXqwVU9dTTHOb75x99hFwCrYCC-DZW41Y7n_bzrH3FKIMKoKJUnJAVdC0vRQP8lKxo1zUll6w-I59SGimlDRf8IznjdcdEUzcrcrsuNmHe6uhS8EUYip_B4pSKh4jWmcX5X8W9x_IZdcyruOjJLftCL8Wjm_HAr-3sUnLBX5APg54Sfn6d5-Tp-_Xj5kd5d39zu1nflaamzVK2oNlQyxah6zWjGpiorWyFsUZAzVAMrdYAWg7S0l5zxKGXkhnBemk7afk5-Xq8u43hZYdpUfkBg9OkPYZdUkzQmjIhGprRq3_QMeyiz99likvKBesgU_JImRhSijiobXSzjnsFVB18q1H95VsdfCsAlX3n7JfXhl0_o31PvgnOwOYIZKn422FUyTj0JtuNaBZlg_uPmj-lzJZN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2639036281</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Comparison of Models Predicting One-Year Mortality at Time of Admission</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Pierce, Robert P. ; Raithel, Seth ; Brandt, Lea ; Clary, Kevin W. ; Craig, Kevin</creator><creatorcontrib>Pierce, Robert P. ; Raithel, Seth ; Brandt, Lea ; Clary, Kevin W. ; Craig, Kevin</creatorcontrib><description>Hospitalization provides an opportunity to address end-of-life care (EoLC) preferences if patients at risk of death can be accurately identified while in the hospital. The modified Hospital One-Year Mortality Risk (mHOMR) uses demographic and admission data in a logistic regression algorithm to identify patients at risk of death one year from admission. This project sought to validate mHOMR and identify superior models. The mHOMR model was validated using historical data from an academic health system. Alternative logistic regression and random forest (RF) models were developed using the same variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and precision recall curves were developed, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were compared over a range of model thresholds. The RF model demonstrated higher area under the ROC curve (0.950, 95% CI 0.947 – 0.954) as compared to the logistic regression models (0.818 [95% CI 0.812 – 0.825] and 0.841 [95% CI 0.836 – 0.847]). Area under the precision recall curve was higher with the random forest model compared to the logistic regression models (0.863 vs. 0.458 and 0.494, respectively). Across a range of thresholds, the RF model demonstrated superior sensitivity, equivalent specificity, and higher positive and negative predictive values. A machine learning RF model, using common demographic and utilization data available on hospital admission, identified inpatients at risk of death more effectively than logistic regression models using the same variables. Machine learning models have promise for identifying admitted patients with elevated one-year mortality risk, increasing opportunities to prompt discussion of EoLC preferences.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0885-3924</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6513</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.11.006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34826545</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>advance care planning ; Advance directives ; clinical decision support ; Data ; Death &amp; dying ; End of life care ; End of life decisions ; Health risks ; Hospice care ; Hospital Mortality ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; Machine Learning ; Medical prognosis ; Mortality ; Palliative care ; random forest ; Retrospective Studies ; ROC Curve ; Thresholds</subject><ispartof>Journal of pain and symptom management, 2022-03, Vol.63 (3), p.e287-e293</ispartof><rights>2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Mar 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6281-0848 ; 0000-0002-9387-7076 ; 0000-0002-5844-9834</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,30999</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34826545$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pierce, Robert P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raithel, Seth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brandt, Lea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clary, Kevin W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, Kevin</creatorcontrib><title>A Comparison of Models Predicting One-Year Mortality at Time of Admission</title><title>Journal of pain and symptom management</title><addtitle>J Pain Symptom Manage</addtitle><description>Hospitalization provides an opportunity to address end-of-life care (EoLC) preferences if patients at risk of death can be accurately identified while in the hospital. The modified Hospital One-Year Mortality Risk (mHOMR) uses demographic and admission data in a logistic regression algorithm to identify patients at risk of death one year from admission. This project sought to validate mHOMR and identify superior models. The mHOMR model was validated using historical data from an academic health system. Alternative logistic regression and random forest (RF) models were developed using the same variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and precision recall curves were developed, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were compared over a range of model thresholds. The RF model demonstrated higher area under the ROC curve (0.950, 95% CI 0.947 – 0.954) as compared to the logistic regression models (0.818 [95% CI 0.812 – 0.825] and 0.841 [95% CI 0.836 – 0.847]). Area under the precision recall curve was higher with the random forest model compared to the logistic regression models (0.863 vs. 0.458 and 0.494, respectively). Across a range of thresholds, the RF model demonstrated superior sensitivity, equivalent specificity, and higher positive and negative predictive values. A machine learning RF model, using common demographic and utilization data available on hospital admission, identified inpatients at risk of death more effectively than logistic regression models using the same variables. Machine learning models have promise for identifying admitted patients with elevated one-year mortality risk, increasing opportunities to prompt discussion of EoLC preferences.</description><subject>advance care planning</subject><subject>Advance directives</subject><subject>clinical decision support</subject><subject>Data</subject><subject>Death &amp; dying</subject><subject>End of life care</subject><subject>End of life decisions</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>Hospice care</subject><subject>Hospital Mortality</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>Machine Learning</subject><subject>Medical prognosis</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Palliative care</subject><subject>random forest</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Thresholds</subject><issn>0885-3924</issn><issn>1873-6513</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkMFO3DAQhi1EVbbQV6iCuPSS1GMnTnxcrShFooIDHDhZjj2pHCX2Ymcr7dvXqwVU9dTTHOb75x99hFwCrYCC-DZW41Y7n_bzrH3FKIMKoKJUnJAVdC0vRQP8lKxo1zUll6w-I59SGimlDRf8IznjdcdEUzcrcrsuNmHe6uhS8EUYip_B4pSKh4jWmcX5X8W9x_IZdcyruOjJLftCL8Wjm_HAr-3sUnLBX5APg54Sfn6d5-Tp-_Xj5kd5d39zu1nflaamzVK2oNlQyxah6zWjGpiorWyFsUZAzVAMrdYAWg7S0l5zxKGXkhnBemk7afk5-Xq8u43hZYdpUfkBg9OkPYZdUkzQmjIhGprRq3_QMeyiz99likvKBesgU_JImRhSijiobXSzjnsFVB18q1H95VsdfCsAlX3n7JfXhl0_o31PvgnOwOYIZKn422FUyTj0JtuNaBZlg_uPmj-lzJZN</recordid><startdate>202203</startdate><enddate>202203</enddate><creator>Pierce, Robert P.</creator><creator>Raithel, Seth</creator><creator>Brandt, Lea</creator><creator>Clary, Kevin W.</creator><creator>Craig, Kevin</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6281-0848</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9387-7076</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-9834</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202203</creationdate><title>A Comparison of Models Predicting One-Year Mortality at Time of Admission</title><author>Pierce, Robert P. ; Raithel, Seth ; Brandt, Lea ; Clary, Kevin W. ; Craig, Kevin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>advance care planning</topic><topic>Advance directives</topic><topic>clinical decision support</topic><topic>Data</topic><topic>Death &amp; dying</topic><topic>End of life care</topic><topic>End of life decisions</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>Hospice care</topic><topic>Hospital Mortality</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>Machine Learning</topic><topic>Medical prognosis</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Palliative care</topic><topic>random forest</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Thresholds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pierce, Robert P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raithel, Seth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brandt, Lea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clary, Kevin W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, Kevin</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of pain and symptom management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pierce, Robert P.</au><au>Raithel, Seth</au><au>Brandt, Lea</au><au>Clary, Kevin W.</au><au>Craig, Kevin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Comparison of Models Predicting One-Year Mortality at Time of Admission</atitle><jtitle>Journal of pain and symptom management</jtitle><addtitle>J Pain Symptom Manage</addtitle><date>2022-03</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e287</spage><epage>e293</epage><pages>e287-e293</pages><issn>0885-3924</issn><eissn>1873-6513</eissn><abstract>Hospitalization provides an opportunity to address end-of-life care (EoLC) preferences if patients at risk of death can be accurately identified while in the hospital. The modified Hospital One-Year Mortality Risk (mHOMR) uses demographic and admission data in a logistic regression algorithm to identify patients at risk of death one year from admission. This project sought to validate mHOMR and identify superior models. The mHOMR model was validated using historical data from an academic health system. Alternative logistic regression and random forest (RF) models were developed using the same variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and precision recall curves were developed, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were compared over a range of model thresholds. The RF model demonstrated higher area under the ROC curve (0.950, 95% CI 0.947 – 0.954) as compared to the logistic regression models (0.818 [95% CI 0.812 – 0.825] and 0.841 [95% CI 0.836 – 0.847]). Area under the precision recall curve was higher with the random forest model compared to the logistic regression models (0.863 vs. 0.458 and 0.494, respectively). Across a range of thresholds, the RF model demonstrated superior sensitivity, equivalent specificity, and higher positive and negative predictive values. A machine learning RF model, using common demographic and utilization data available on hospital admission, identified inpatients at risk of death more effectively than logistic regression models using the same variables. Machine learning models have promise for identifying admitted patients with elevated one-year mortality risk, increasing opportunities to prompt discussion of EoLC preferences.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>34826545</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.11.006</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6281-0848</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9387-7076</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-9834</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0885-3924
ispartof Journal of pain and symptom management, 2022-03, Vol.63 (3), p.e287-e293
issn 0885-3924
1873-6513
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2604026650
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); ScienceDirect Freedom Collection
subjects advance care planning
Advance directives
clinical decision support
Data
Death & dying
End of life care
End of life decisions
Health risks
Hospice care
Hospital Mortality
Hospitalization
Humans
Logistic Models
Machine Learning
Medical prognosis
Mortality
Palliative care
random forest
Retrospective Studies
ROC Curve
Thresholds
title A Comparison of Models Predicting One-Year Mortality at Time of Admission
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T06%3A18%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Comparison%20of%20Models%20Predicting%20One-Year%20Mortality%20at%20Time%20of%20Admission&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20pain%20and%20symptom%20management&rft.au=Pierce,%20Robert%20P.&rft.date=2022-03&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e287&rft.epage=e293&rft.pages=e287-e293&rft.issn=0885-3924&rft.eissn=1873-6513&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.11.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2604026650%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-71a2f497e18ba20a1264d976cdc6142e6f7aa11a9f9d0ba3eefb992c62b9d89d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2639036281&rft_id=info:pmid/34826545&rfr_iscdi=true