Dataset Information

Derivation and external validation of a simple risk score to predict in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Abstract

As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 continues to spread, easy-to-use risk models that predict hospital mortality can assist in clinical decision making and triage. We aimed to develop a risk score model for in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) that was robust across hospitals and used clinical factors that are readily available and measured standardly across hospitals.In this retrospective observational study, we developed a risk score model using data collected by trained abstractors for patients in 20 diverse hospitals across the state of Michigan (Mi-COVID19) who were discharged between March 5, 2020 and August 14, 2020. Patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 during hospitalization or were discharged with an ICD-10 code for COVID-19 (U07.1) were included. We employed an iterative forward selection approach to consider the inclusion of 145 potential risk factors available at hospital presentation. Model performance was externally validated with patients from 19 hospitals in the Mi-COVID19 registry not used in model development. We shared the model in an easy-to-use online application that allows the user to predict in-hospital mortality risk for a patient if they have any subset of the variables in the final model.Two thousand one hundred and ninety-three patients in the Mi-COVID19 registry met our inclusion criteria. The derivation and validation sets ultimately included 1690 and 398 patients, respectively, with mortality rates of 19.6% and 18.6%, respectively. The average age of participants in the study after exclusions was 64 years old, and the participants were 48% female, 49% Black, and 87% non-Hispanic. Our final model includes the patient's age, first recorded respiratory rate, first recorded pulse oximetry, highest creatinine level on day of presentation, and hospital's COVID-19 mortality rate. No other factors showed sufficient incremental model improvement to warrant inclusion. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for the derivation and validation sets were .796 (95% confidence interval, .767-.826) and .829 (95% confidence interval, .782-.876) respectively.We conclude that the risk of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients can be reliably estimated using a few factors, which are standardly measured and available to physicians very early in a hospital encounter.

SUBMITTER: Mann CZ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8500634 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe worldwide pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has still been an overwhelming public health challenge, and it is vital to identify determinants early to forecast the risk of severity using indicators easily available at admission. The current multicenter retrospective study aimed to derive and validate a user-friendly and effective nomogram to address this issue.MethodsA training cohort consisting of 437 confirmed COVID-19 cases from three hospitals in Hubei province (Tongji Hospital affiliated with Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan Third Hospital of Wuhan University and Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital in Hubei province) was retrospectively analyzed to construct a predicting model, and another cohort of 161 hospitalized patients from Public Health Clinical Center of Shanghai was selected as an external validation cohort from January 1, 2020 to March 8, 2020. Determinants of developing into severe COVID-19 were probed using univariate regression together with a multivariate stepwise regression model. The risk of progression to severe COVID-19 was forecasted using the derived nomogram. The performances of the nomogram regarding the discrimination and calibration were assessed in the cohort of training as well as the cohort of external validation, respectively.ResultsA total of 144 (32.95%) and 54 (33.54%) patients, respectively, in cohorts of training and validation progressed to severe COVID-19 during hospitalization. Multivariable analyses showed determinants of severity consisted of hypertension, shortness of breath, platelet count, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), potassium, cardiac troponin I (cTnI), myohemoglobin, procalcitonin (PCT) and intervals from onset to diagnosis. The nomogram had good discrimination with concordance indices being 0.887 (95% CI: 0.854-0.919) and 0.850 (95% CI: 0.815-0.885) in internal and external validation, respectively. Calibration curves exhibited excellent concordance between the predictions by nomogram and actual observations in two cohorts.ConclusionsWe have established and validated an early predicting nomogram model, which can contribute to determine COVID-19 cases at risk of progression to severe illness.

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop and externally validate a prediction model for severe cisplatin associated acute kidney injury (CP-AKI).DesignMulticenter cohort study.SettingSix geographically diverse major academic cancer centers across the US.ParticipantsAdults (≥18 years) receiving their first dose of intravenous cisplatin, 2006-22.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was CP-AKI, defined as a twofold or greater increase in serum creatinine or kidney replacement therapy within 14 days of a first dose of intravenous cisplatin. Independent predictors of CP-AKI were identified using a multivariable logistic regression model, which was developed in a derivation cohort and tested in an external validation cohort. For the primary model, continuous variables were examined using restricted cubic splines. A simple risk model was also generated by converting the odds ratios from the primary model into risk points. Finally, a multivariable Cox model was used to examine the association between severity of CP-AKI and 90 day survival.ResultsA total of 24 717 adults were included, with 11 766 in the derivation cohort (median age 59 (interquartile range (IQR) 50-67)) and 12 951 in the validation cohort (median age 60 (IQR 50-67)). The incidence of CP-AKI was 5.2% (608/11 766) in the derivation cohort and 3.3% (421/12 951) in the validation cohort. Each of the following factors were independently associated with CP-AKI in the derivation cohort: age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, serum creatinine level, hemoglobin level, white blood cell count, platelet count, serum albumin level, serum magnesium level, and cisplatin dose. A simple risk score consisting of nine covariates was shown to predict a higher risk of CP-AKI in a monotonic fashion in both the derivation cohort and the validation cohort. Compared with patients in the lowest risk category, those in the highest risk category showed a 24.00-fold (95% confidence interval (CI) 13.49-fold to 42.78-fold) higher odds of CP-AKI in the derivation cohort and a 17.87-fold (10.56-fold to 29.60-fold) higher odds in the validation cohort. The primary model had a C statistic of 0.75 and showed better discrimination for CP-AKI than previously published models, the C statistics for which ranged from 0.60 to 0.68 (DeLong P<0.001 for each comparison). Greater severity of CP-AKI was monotonically associated with shorter 90 day survival (adjusted hazard ratio 4.63 (95% CI 3.56 to 6.02) for stage 3 CP-AKI versus no CP-AKI).ConclusionThis study found that a simple risk score based on readily available variables from patients receiving intravenous cisplatin could predict the risk of severe CP-AKI, the occurrence of which is strongly associated with death.

Project description:BackgroundAcute respiratory failure occurs frequently in hospitalized patients and often starts before ICU admission. A risk stratification tool to predict mortality and risk for mechanical ventilation (MV) may allow for earlier evaluation and intervention. We developed and validated an automated electronic health record (EHR)-based model-Accurate Prediction of Prolonged Ventilation (APPROVE)-to identify patients at risk of death or respiratory failure requiring >= 48 h of MV.MethodsThis was an observational study of adults admitted to four hospitals in 2013 or a fifth hospital in 2017. Clinical data were extracted from the EHRs. The 2013 patients were randomly split 50:50 into a derivation/validation cohort. The qualifying event was death or intubation leading to MV >= 48 h. Random forest method was used in model derivation. APPROVE was calculated retrospectively whenever data were available in 2013, and prospectively every 4 h after hospital admission in 2017. The Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were calculated at the same times as APPROVE. Clinicians were not alerted except for APPROVE in 2017cohort.ResultsThere were 68,775 admissions in 2013 and 2258 in 2017. APPROVE had an area under the receiver operator curve of 0.87 (95% CI 0.85-0.88) in 2013 and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.95) in 2017, which is significantly better than the MEWS and NEWS in 2013 but similar to the MEWS and NEWS in 2017. At a threshold of > 0.25, APPROVE had similar sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) (sensitivity 63% and PPV 21% in 2013 vs 64% and 16%, respectively, in 2017). Compared to APPROVE in 2013, at a threshold to achieve comparable PPV (19% at MEWS > 4 and 22% at NEWS > 6), the MEWS and NEWS had lower sensitivity (16% for MEWS and NEWS). Similarly in 2017, at a comparable sensitivity threshold (64% for APPROVE > 0.25 and 67% for MEWS and NEWS > 4), more patients who triggered an alert developed the event with APPROVE (PPV 16%) while achieving a lower false positive rate (FPR 5%) compared to the MEWS (PPV 7%, FPR 14%) and NEWS (PPV 4%, FPR 25%).ConclusionsAn automated EHR model to identify patients at high risk of MV or death was validated retrospectively and prospectively, and was determined to be feasible for real-time risk identification.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02488174 . Registered on 18 March 2015.

Project description:BackgroundIdentification of patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospital admission or at high-risk of in-hospital mortality is essential to guide patient triage and to provide timely treatment for higher risk hospitalized patients.MethodsA retrospective multi-centre (8 hospital) cohort at Beaumont Health, Michigan, USA, reporting on COVID-19 patients diagnosed between 1 March and 1 April 2020 was used for score validation. The COVID-19 Risk of Complications Score was automatically computed by the EHR. Multivariate logistic regression models were built to predict hospital admission and in-hospital mortality using individual variables constituting the score. Validation was performed using both discrimination and calibration.ResultsCompared to Green scores, Yellow Scores (OR: 5.72) and Red Scores (OR: 19.1) had significantly higher odds of admission (both p < .0001). Similarly, Yellow Scores (OR: 4.73) and Red Scores (OR: 13.3) had significantly higher odds of in-hospital mortality than Green Scores (both p < .0001). The cross-validated C-Statistics for the external validation cohort showed good discrimination for both hospital admission (C = 0.79 (95% CI: 0.77-0.81)) and in-hospital mortality (C = 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78)).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 Risk of Complications Score predicts the need for hospital admission and in-hospital mortality patients with COVID-19. Key points: Can an electronic health record generated risk score predict the risk of hospital admission and in-hospital mortality in patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)? In both validation cohorts of 2,025 and 1,290 COVID-19, the cross-validated C-Statistics showed good discrimination for both hospital admission (C = 0.79 (95% CI: 0.77-0.81)) and in-hospital mortality (C = 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78)), respectively. The COVID-19 Risk of Complications Score may help predict the need for hospital admission if a patient contracts SARS-CoV-2 infection and in-hospital mortality for a hospitalized patient with COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 mortality risk stratification tools could improve care, inform accurate and rapid triage decisions, and guide family discussions regarding goals of care. A minority of COVID-19 prognostic tools have been tested in external cohorts. Our objective was to compare machine learning algorithms and develop a tool for predicting subsequent clinical outcomes in COVID-19. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study that included hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from March 2020 to March 2021. 712 consecutive patients from University of Washington (UW) and 345 patients from Tongji Hospital in China were included. We applied three different machine learning algorithms to clinical and laboratory data collected within the initial 24 hours of hospital admission to determine the risk of in-hospital mortality, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU), shock requiring vasopressors, and receipt of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Mortality risk models were derived, internally validated in UW and externally validated in Tongji Hospital. The risk models for ICU transfer, shock and RRT were derived and internally validated in the UW dataset. ResultsAmong the UW dataset, 122 patients died (17%) during hospitalization and the mean days to hospital mortality was 15.7 +/- 21.5 (mean +/- SD). Elastic net logistic regression resulted in a C-statistic for in-hospital mortality of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81) in the internal validation and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.89) in the external validation set. Age, platelet count, and white blood cell count were the most important predictors of mortality. In the sub-group of patients > 50 years of age, the mortality prediction model continued to perform with a C-statistic of 0.82 (95% CI:0.76,0.87). Mortality prediction models also performed well for shock and RRT in the UW dataset but functioned with lower accuracy for ICU transfer. ConclusionsWe trained, internally and externally validated a prediction model using data collected within 24 hours of hospital admission to predict in-hospital mortality on average two weeks prior to death. We also developed models to predict RRT and shock with high accuracy. These models could be used to improve triage decisions, resource allocation, and support clinical trial enrichment.

Project description:COVID-19 mortality risk stratification tools could improve care, inform accurate and rapid triage decisions, and guide family discussions regarding goals of care. A minority of COVID-19 prognostic tools have been tested in external cohorts. Our objective was to compare machine learning algorithms and develop a tool for predicting subsequent clinical outcomes in COVID-19. We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from March 2020 to March 2021. Seven Hundred Twelve consecutive patients from University of Washington and 345 patients from Tongji Hospital in China were included. We applied three different machine learning algorithms to clinical and laboratory data collected within the initial 24 h of hospital admission to determine the risk of in-hospital mortality, transfer to the intensive care unit, shock requiring vasopressors, and receipt of renal replacement therapy. Mortality risk models were derived, internally validated in UW and externally validated in Tongji Hospital. The risk models for ICU transfer, shock and RRT were derived and internally validated in the UW dataset but were unable to be externally validated due to a lack of data on these outcomes. Among the UW dataset, 122 patients died (17%) during hospitalization and the mean days to hospital mortality was 15.7 +/- 21.5 (mean +/- SD). Elastic net logistic regression resulted in a C-statistic for in-hospital mortality of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81) in the internal validation and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.89) in the external validation set. Age, platelet count, and white blood cell count were the most important predictors of mortality. In the sub-group of patients > 50 years of age, the mortality prediction model continued to perform with a C-statistic of 0.82 (95% CI:0.76,0.87). Prediction models also performed well for shock and RRT in the UW dataset but functioned with lower accuracy for ICU transfer. We trained, internally and externally validated a prediction model using data collected within 24 h of hospital admission to predict in-hospital mortality on average two weeks prior to death. We also developed models to predict RRT and shock with high accuracy. These models could be used to improve triage decisions, resource allocation, and support clinical trial enrichment.

Dataset Information

Derivation and external validation of a simple risk score to predict in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Abstract

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets