ArticleBMJ quality & safety2023
Evaluating equity in performance of an electronic health record-based 6-month mortality risk model to trigger palliative care consultation: a retrospective model validation analysis.
Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- External validation of a proprietary risk model for 1-year mortality in community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Exploring the economic occupational health, safety, and fatal accidents in high-risk industries.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEvaluate predictive performance of an electronic health record (EHR)-based, inpatient 6-month mortality risk model developed to trigger palliative care consultation among patient groups stratified by age, race, ethnicity, insurance and socioeconomic status (SES), which may vary due to social forces (eg, racism) that shape health, healthcare and health data.
designRetrospective evaluation of prediction model.
settingThree urban hospitals within a single health system.
participantsAll patients ≥18 years admitted between 1 January and 31 December 2017, excluding observation, obstetric, rehabilitation and hospice (n=58 464 encounters, 41 327 patients).
main outcome measuresGeneral performance metrics (c-statistic, integrated calibration index (ICI), Brier Score) and additional measures relevant to health equity (accuracy, false positive rate (FPR), false negative rate (FNR)).
resultsFor black versus non-Hispanic white patients, the model's accuracy was higher (0.051, 95% CI 0.044 to 0.059), FPR lower (-0.060, 95% CI -0.067 to -0.052) and FNR higher (0.049, 95% CI 0.023 to 0.078). A similar pattern was observed among patients who were Hispanic, younger, with Medicaid/missing insurance, or living in low SES zip codes. No consistent differences emerged in c-statistic, ICI or Brier Score. Younger age had the second-largest effect size in the mortality prediction model, and there were large standardised group differences in age (eg, 0.32 for non-Hispanic white versus black patients), suggesting age may contribute to systematic differences in the predicted probabilities between groups.
conclusionsAn EHR-based mortality risk model was less likely to identify some marginalised patients as potentially benefiting from palliative care, with younger age pinpointed as a possible mechanism. Evaluating predictive performance is a critical preliminary step in addressing algorithmic inequities in healthcare, which must also include evaluating clinical impact, and governance and regulatory structures for oversight, monitoring and accountability.
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.