Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35028862›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Risk-Adjusting Mortality in the Nationwide Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.

Hallie C Prescott, Rajendra P Kadel, Julie R Eyman, Ron Freyberg, Matthew Quarrick, David Brewer, Rachael Hasselbeck

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hallie C PrescottVA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. hprescot@med.umich.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8442-6724
Rajendra P KadelVA Center for Strategic Analytics and Reporting, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 810 Vermont Ave. NW Room 668, Washington, DC, 20420, USA.
Julie R EymanVA Center for Strategic Analytics and Reporting, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 810 Vermont Ave. NW Room 668, Washington, DC, 20420, USA.
Ron FreybergVA Center for Strategic Analytics and Reporting, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 810 Vermont Ave. NW Room 668, Washington, DC, 20420, USA.
Matthew QuarrickVA Center for Strategic Analytics and Reporting, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 810 Vermont Ave. NW Room 668, Washington, DC, 20420, USA.
David BrewerVA Center for Strategic Analytics and Reporting, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 810 Vermont Ave. NW Room 668, Washington, DC, 20420, USA.
Rachael HasselbeckVA Inpatient Evaluation Center, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, 810 Vermont Ave. NW Room 668, Washington, DC, 20420, USA.
United States Department of Veterans Affairs · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

Benchmarking Hospital Quality: Template Matching versus Conventional Regression ApproachesI01HX002546 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI PRESCOTT, HALLIE CHRISTINE · 2018 to 2021
–
HSRD VA I01 HX002546HSRD VA IIR 17-2019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe US Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system began reporting risk-adjusted mortality for intensive care (ICU) admissions in 2005. However, while the VA's mortality model has been updated and adapted for risk-adjustment of all inpatient hospitalizations, recent model performance has not been published. We sought to assess the current performance of VA's 4 standardized mortality models: acute care 30-day mortality (acute care SMR-30); ICU 30-day mortality (ICU SMR-30); acute care in-hospital mortality (acute care SMR); and ICU in-hospital mortality (ICU SMR).

methodsRetrospective cohort study with split derivation and validation samples. Standardized mortality models were fit using derivation data, with coefficients applied to the validation sample. Nationwide VA hospitalizations that met model inclusion criteria during fiscal years 2017-2018(derivation) and 2019 (validation) were included. Model performance was evaluated using c-statistics to assess discrimination and comparison of observed versus predicted deaths to assess calibration.

resultsAmong 1,143,351 hospitalizations eligible for the acute care SMR-30 during 2017-2019, in-hospital mortality was 1.8%, and 30-day mortality was 4.3%. C-statistics for the SMR models in validation data were 0.870 (acute care SMR-30); 0.864 (ICU SMR-30); 0.914 (acute care SMR); and 0.887 (ICU SMR). There were 16,036 deaths (4.29% mortality) in the SMR-30 validation cohort versus 17,458 predicted deaths (4.67%), reflecting 0.38% over-prediction. Across deciles of predicted risk, the absolute difference in observed versus predicted percent mortality was a mean of 0.38%, with a maximum error of 1.81% seen in the highest-risk decile. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The VA's SMR models, which incorporate patient physiology on presentation, are highly predictive and demonstrate good calibration both overall and across risk deciles. The current SMR models perform similarly to the initial ICU SMR model, indicating appropriate adaption and re-calibration.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsVeteransDelivery of Health CareHospital MortalityHumansRetrospective Studieshospital mortalitylogistic modelsrisk adjustment

Identifiers

PMID35028862
PMCPMC9640507
OpenAlexW4205255698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.