ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018
Predicting 30-Day Hospital Readmissions in Acute Myocardial Infarction: The AMI "READMITS" (Renal Function, Elevated Brain Natriuretic Peptide, Age, Diabetes Mellitus
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prediction models for hospital readmissions in patients with heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Use of electronic medical records in development and validation of risk prediction models of hospital readmission: systematic review.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2020Pooled it
- The prevalence of 30-day readmission after acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2019Pooled it
- Augmenting the Hospital Score with social risk factors to improve prediction for 30-day readmission following acute myocardial infarction.Medical research archives · 2024Article
- Using the Super Learner algorithm to predict risk of major adverse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with myocardial infarction.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Prediction Models for Readmission in Coronary Artery Disease Patients: Assessing Current Efficacy and Future Directions.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Review
- Long-Term Hospital Readmission after ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A 3-Year Follow-up from the SEMI-CI Study.The journal of Tehran Heart Center · 2022Article
- The predictive value of CatLet© angiographic scoring system for long-term prognosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting > 12 h after symptom onset.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Early (0-7 day) and late (8-30 day) readmission predictors in acute coronary syndrome, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure patients.Hospital practice (1995) · 2021Article
- Models Predicting Hospital Admission of Adult Patients Utilizing Prehospital Data: Systematic Review Using PROBAST and CHARMS.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Review
- Man vs. Machine: Comparing Physician vs. Electronic Health Record-Based Model Predictions for 30-Day Hospital Readmissions.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Development of Electronic Health Record-Based Prediction Models for 30-Day Readmission Risk Among Patients Hospitalized for Acute Myocardial Infarction.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- The correlation between PLR-NLR and prognosis in acute myocardial infarction.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Thirty-Day Readmission Risk Model for Older Adults Hospitalized With Acute Myocardial Infarction.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2019Article
- Predictors of Early (0-7 Days) and Late (8-30 Days) Readmission in a Cohort of Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients.International journal of medical studentsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReadmissions after hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are common. However, the few currently available AMI readmission risk prediction models have poor-to-modest predictive ability and are not readily actionable in real time. We sought to develop an actionable and accurate AMI readmission risk prediction model to identify high-risk patients as early as possible during hospitalization. METHODS AND
resultsWe used electronic health record data from consecutive AMI hospitalizations from 6 hospitals in north Texas from 2009 to 2010 to derive and validate models predicting all-cause nonelective 30-day readmissions, using stepwise backward selection and 5-fold cross-validation. Of 826 patients hospitalized with AMI, 13% had a 30-day readmission. The first-day AMI model (the AMI "READMITS" score) included 7 predictors: renal function, elevated brain natriuretic peptide, age, diabetes mellitus, nonmale sex, intervention with timely percutaneous coronary intervention, and low systolic blood pressure, had an optimism-corrected C-statistic of 0.73 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.74) and was well calibrated. The full-stay AMI model, which included 3 additional predictors (use of intravenous diuretics, anemia on discharge, and discharge to postacute care), had an optimism-corrected C-statistic of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.76) with minimally improved net reclassification and calibration. Both AMI models outperformed corresponding multicondition readmission models.
conclusionsThe parsimonious AMI READMITS score enables early prospective identification of high-risk AMI patients for targeted readmissions reduction interventions within the first 24 hours of hospitalization. A full-stay AMI readmission model only modestly outperformed the AMI READMITS score in terms of discrimination, but surprisingly did
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.