ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2021
Performance of intensive care unit severity scoring systems across different ethnicities.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite wide utilisation of severity scoring systems for case-mix determination and benchmarking in the intensive care unit, the possibility of scoring bias across ethnicities has not been examined. Recent guidelines on the use of illness severity scores to inform triage decisions for allocation of scarce resources such as mechanical ventilation during the current COVID-19 pandemic warrant examination for possible bias in these models. We investigated the performance of three severity scoring systems (APACHE IVa, OASIS, SOFA) across ethnic groups in two large ICU databases in order to identify possible ethnicity-based bias.
methodData from the eICU Collaborative Research Database and the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care were analysed for score performance in Asians, African Americans, Hispanics and Whites after appropriate exclusions. Discrimination and calibration were determined for all three scoring systems in all four groups.
findingsWhile measurements of discrimination -area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) -were significantly different among the groups, they did not display any discernible systematic patterns of bias. In contrast, measurements of calibration -standardised mortality ratio (SMR) -indicated persistent, and in some cases significant, patterns of difference between Hispanics and African Americans versus Asians and Whites. The differences between African Americans and Whites were consistently statistically significant. While calibrations were imperfect for all groups, the scores consistently demonstrated a pattern of over-predicting mortality for African Americans and Hispanics.
interpretationThe systematic differences in calibration across ethnic groups suggest that illness severity scores reflect bias in their predictions of mortality.
fundingLAC is funded by the National Institute of Health through NIBIB R01 EB017205. There was no specific funding for this study.
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.