ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Evaluation of SOFA-2 Score Performance Across Demographic Subgroups: An External Validation Study Using MIMIC-IV.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-2 score was recently validated for ICU mortality prediction across more than 3 million admissions but was not evaluated across demographic subgroups. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of the SOFA-2 score for ICU mortality across subgroups defined by age, sex, race and ethnicity, primary language, and insurance status. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients (aged 18 years or older) admitted to ICUs at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2008 and 2022 (MIMIC-IV, version 3.1), selecting the first ICU admission per patient. First-day SOFA-2 scores (range, 0-24) were calculated using worst recorded values across 6 organ systems. Discrimination was assessed using AUROC, calibration using intercepts and slopes, and subgroup differences using bootstrap resampling. Among 64,015 ICU admissions (median age, 66 years [IQR, 54-78]; 56.1% male; 66.1% White), overall ICU mortality was 7.2% (n=4,596). Overall AUROC was acceptable at 0.77 (95% CI, 0.76-0.77). Notably, discrimination declined significantly with age: AUROC was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.87) for ages 18-44 and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for ages 75 and older (difference in AUROC, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.16 to -0.11), with systematic underprediction of mortality in older patients (calibration intercept, 0.39). Discrimination was also significantly lower among non-English speakers (difference in AUROC, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01) but did not differ significantly across documented racial and ethnic groups. Patients with unknown race/ethnicity (14.3% of the cohort) had nearly double the overall mortality rate and poor calibration. SOFA-2 demonstrated good overall performance for ICU mortality prediction but with clinically meaningful variation across demographic subgroups, particularly a substantial decline in discrimination with advancing age. These findings underscore the need for routine equity evaluation of clinical prediction tools before widespread implementation.
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.