ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025
External validation of a proprietary risk model for 1-year mortality in community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Externally Validated Epic Clinical Decision Support Tools.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Accuracy and Equity of the End-of-Life Care Index in Predicting 1-Year Mortality.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the discrimination, calibration, and algorithmic fairness of the Epic End of Life Care Index (EOL-CI). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe assessed the EOL-CI's performance by estimating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and positive and negative predictive values in community-dwelling adults ≥65 years of age in a single health system in the Southeastern United States. Algorithmic fairness was examined by comparing the model's performance across sex, race, and ethnicity subgroups. Using a machine learning approach, we also explored local re-calibration of the EOL-CI considering additional information on past hospitalizations and frailty.
resultsAmong 215 731 patients (median age = 74 years, 57% female, 12% of Black race), 10% were classified as medium risk (15-44) and 3% as high risk (≥45) by the EOL-CI. The observed 1-year mortality rate was 3%. The EOL-CI had an AUC 0.82 for 1-year mortality, with a positive predictive value of 22%. Predictive performance was generally similar across sex and race subgroups, though the EOL-CI displayed better performance with increasing age and in older adults with 2 or more outpatient encounters in the past 24 months. Local re-calibration of the EOL-CI was required to provide absolute estimates of mortality risk, and calibration was further improved when the EOL-CI was augmented with data on inpatient hospitalizations and frailty. DISCUSSION: The EOL-CI demonstrates reasonable discrimination, albeit with better performance in older adults and in those with greater health system contact.
conclusionLocal refinement and calibration of the EOL-CI score is required to provide direct estimates of prognosis, with the goal of making the EOL-CI a more a valuable tool at the point of care for identifying patients who would benefit from targeted palliative care interventions and proactive care planning.
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.