ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2025
Comparing Single-Hospital and National Models to Predict 30-Day Inpatient Mortality.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2025. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvances in artificial intelligence and machine learning have facilitated the creation of mortality prediction models which are increasingly used to assess quality of care and inform clinical practice. One open question is whether a hospital should utilize a mortality model trained from a diverse nationwide dataset or use a model developed primarily from their local hospital data.
objectiveTo compare performance of a single-hospital, 30-day all-cause mortality model against an established national benchmark on the task of mortality prediction. DESIGN/
participantsWe developed a single-hospital mortality prediction model using 9975 consecutive inpatient admissions at the Department of Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System from July 26, 2018, to September 30, 2021, and compared performance against an established national model with similar features. MAIN MEASURES: Both the single-hospital model and the national model placed each patient in one of five prediction bins: < 2.5%, 2.5-5%, 5-10%, 10-30%, and ≥ 30% risks of 30-day mortality. Evaluation metrics included receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and balanced accuracy. Final comparisons were made between the single-hospital model trained on the full training set and the national model for both metrics and prediction overlap. KEY
resultsWith sufficiently large training sets of 2720 or greater inpatient admissions, there was no statistically significant difference between the performances of the national model (ROC AUC 0.89, 95%CI [0.858, 0.919]) and single-hospital model (ROC AUC 0.878, 95%CI [0.84, 0.912]). For the 89 mortality events in the test set, the single-hospital model agreed with the national model risk assessment or an adjacent risk assessment in 92.1% of the encounters.
conclusionsA single-hospital inpatient mortality prediction model can achieve performance comparable to a national model when evaluated on a single-hospital population, given sufficient sample size.
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.