ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020
Development, implementation, and prospective validation of a model to predict 60-day end-of-life in hospitalized adults upon admission at three sites.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Application of artificial intelligence in palliative care: a bibliometric analysis of research hotspots and trends.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Stage-stratified benefits of AI-radiomics PET in early Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- Review
- Machine learning-based prediction of meniscal tears in ACL reconstruction using BMI, time to surgery, injury mechanism, and Tegner activity score: A temporally validated decision tool.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Targeted Digital Health Intervention in End-of-Life and Hospice Care: A Scoping Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Implementation and Updating of Clinical Prediction Models: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Geriatric End-of-Life Screening Tool Prediction of 6-Month Mortality in Older Patients.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Can a 5-to-90-day Mortality Predictor Perform Consistently Across Time and Equitably Across Populations?Journal of medical systems · 2023Article
- Automatable end-of-life screening for older adults in the emergency department using electronic health records.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2023Observational
- Frailty, Comorbidity, and Associations With In-Hospital Mortality in Older COVID-19 Patients: Exploratory Study of Administrative Data.Interactive journal of medical research · 2022Article
- Synchrony of biomarker variability indicates a critical transition: Application to mortality prediction in hemodialysis.iScience · 2022Article
- Open-Source Clinical Machine Learning Models: Critical Appraisal of Feasibility, Advantages, and Challenges.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Expected clinical utility of automatable prediction models for improving palliative and end-of-life care outcomes: Toward routine decision analysis before implementation.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging quality control, quality assurance and quality improvement.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutomated systems that use machine learning to estimate a patient's risk of death are being developed to influence care. There remains sparse transparent reporting of model generalizability in different subpopulations especially for implemented systems.
methodsA prognostic study included adult admissions at a multi-site, academic medical center between 2015 and 2017. A predictive model for all-cause mortality (including initiation of hospice care) within 60 days of admission was developed. Model generalizability is assessed in temporal validation in the context of potential demographic bias. A subsequent prospective cohort study was conducted at the same sites between October 2018 and June 2019. Model performance during prospective validation was quantified with areas under the receiver operating characteristic and precision recall curves stratified by site. Prospective results include timeliness, positive predictive value, and the number of actionable predictions.
resultsThree years of development data included 128,941 inpatient admissions (94,733 unique patients) across sites where patients are mostly white (61%) and female (60%) and 4.2% led to death within 60 days. A random forest model incorporating 9614 predictors produced areas under the receiver operating characteristic and precision recall curves of 87.2 (95% CI, 86.1-88.2) and 28.0 (95% CI, 25.0-31.0) in temporal validation. Performance marginally diverges within sites as the patient mix shifts from development to validation (patients of one site increases from 10 to 38%). Applied prospectively for nine months, 41,728 predictions were generated in real-time (median [IQR], 1.3 [0.9, 32] minutes). An operating criterion of 75% positive predictive value identified 104 predictions at very high risk (0.25%) where 65% (50 from 77 well-timed predictions) led to death within 60 days.
conclusionTemporal validation demonstrates good model discrimination for 60-day mortality. Slight performance variations are observed across demographic subpopulations. The model was implemented prospectively and successfully produced meaningful estimates of risk within minutes of admission.
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.