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...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of pain and symptom management 2022-03, Vol.63 (3), p.e287-e293 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & 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 |