• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Effect of changing patient mix on the performance of an intensive care unit severity-of-illness model: how to distinguish a general from a specialty intensive care unit.

作者信息

Murphy-Filkins R, Teres D, Lemeshow S, Hosmer D W

机构信息

University of Massachusetts, School of Public Health, USA.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 1996 Dec;24(12):1968-73. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199612000-00007.

DOI:10.1097/00003246-199612000-00007
PMID:8968263
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effects of patient mix diversity on performance of an intensive care unit (ICU) severity-of-illness model.

DESIGN

Multiple patient populations were created using computer simulations. A customized version of the Mortality Probability Model (MPM) II admission model was used to ascertain probabilities of hospital mortality. Performance of the model was assessed using discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and calibration (goodness-of-fit testing).

SETTING

Intensive care units.

PATIENTS

Data were collected from 4,224 ICU patients from two Massachusetts hospitals (Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA; University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA) and two New York hospitals (Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY; Ellis Hospital, Schenectady, NY).

INTERVENTIONS

Random samples were taken from a database. The percentage of patients with each model disease characteristic was varied by assigning weights (ranging from 0 to 10) to patients with a disease characteristic. Three simulations were run for each of 15 model variables at each of 16 weights, totaling 720 simulations.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and model fit were assessed in each random sample. Removing patients with a given disease characteristic did not affect discrimination or calibration. Increasing frequency of patients with each disease characteristic above the original frequency caused discrimination and calibration to deteriorate. Model fit was more robust to increases in less frequently occurring patient conditions. From the goodness-of-fit test, a critical percentage for each admission model variable was determined for each disease characteristic, defined as the percentage at which the average p value for the test over the three replications decreased to < .10.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of critical percentages is potentially clinically important. It might provide an easy first step in checking applicability of a given severity-of-illness model and in defining a general medical-surgical ICU. If the critical percentages are exceeded, as might occur in a highly specialized ICU, the model would not be accurate. Alternative modeling approaches might be to customize the model coefficients to the population for more accurate probabilities or to develop specialized models. The MPM approach remained robust for a large variation in patient mix factors.

摘要

相似文献

1
Effect of changing patient mix on the performance of an intensive care unit severity-of-illness model: how to distinguish a general from a specialty intensive care unit.
Crit Care Med. 1996 Dec;24(12):1968-73. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199612000-00007.
2
Factors affecting the performance of the models in the Mortality Probability Model II system and strategies of customization: a simulation study.影响死亡率概率模型II系统中模型性能的因素及定制策略:一项模拟研究。
Crit Care Med. 1996 Jan;24(1):57-63. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199601000-00011.
3
Subgroup mortality probability models: are they necessary for specialized intensive care units?亚组死亡概率模型:它们对专科重症监护病房来说是必要的吗?
Crit Care Med. 2009 Aug;37(8):2375-86. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a12851.
4
Impact of different customization strategies in the performance of a general severity score.不同定制策略对一般严重程度评分性能的影响。
Crit Care Med. 1997 Dec;25(12):2001-8. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199712000-00017.
5
Mortality probability models for patients in the intensive care unit for 48 or 72 hours: a prospective, multicenter study.重症监护病房患者48或72小时死亡率概率模型:一项前瞻性多中心研究。
Crit Care Med. 1994 Sep;22(9):1351-8. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199409000-00003.
6
A comparison of severity of illness scoring systems for intensive care unit patients: results of a multicenter, multinational study. The European/North American Severity Study Group.重症监护病房患者疾病严重程度评分系统的比较:一项多中心、跨国研究的结果。欧洲/北美严重程度研究组。
Crit Care Med. 1995 Aug;23(8):1327-35. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199508000-00005.
7
A comparison of severity of illness scoring systems for elderly patients with severe pneumonia.老年重症肺炎患者疾病严重程度评分系统的比较
Intensive Care Med. 2000 Dec;26(12):1803-10. doi: 10.1007/s001340000719.
8
Customized probability models for early severe sepsis in adult intensive care patients. Intensive Care Unit Scoring Group.成人重症监护患者早期严重脓毒症的定制概率模型。重症监护病房评分小组。
JAMA. 1995 Feb 22;273(8):644-50.
9
A comparison of the performance of a model based on administrative data and a model based on clinical data: effect of severity of illness on standardized mortality ratios of intensive care units.基于行政数据的模型与基于临床数据的模型性能比较:疾病严重程度对重症监护病房标准化死亡率的影响。
Crit Care Med. 2012 Feb;40(2):373-8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318232d7b0.
10
Assessment of six mortality prediction models in patients admitted with severe sepsis and septic shock to the intensive care unit: a prospective cohort study.对入住重症监护病房的严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克患者的六种死亡率预测模型的评估:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Crit Care. 2003 Oct;7(5):R116-22. doi: 10.1186/cc2373. Epub 2003 Aug 28.

引用本文的文献

1
Performance of Pediatric Risk of Mortality IV in Brazilian PICUs: A Multicenter Prospective Study.巴西重症监护病房中儿童死亡风险IV评分的表现:一项多中心前瞻性研究。
Crit Care Explor. 2025 Mar 28;7(4):e1243. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000001243. eCollection 2025 Apr 1.
2
Assessment of Phoenix Sepsis Score, pSOFA, PELOD-2, and PRISM III in Pediatric Intensive Care.小儿重症监护中凤凰脓毒症评分、序贯器官衰竭评估(pSOFA)、儿科死亡概率模型2(PELOD-2)及小儿死亡风险评估系统(PRISM III)的评估
Children (Basel). 2025 Feb 21;12(3):262. doi: 10.3390/children12030262.
3
The association between procalcitonin and acute kidney injury in patients stung by wasps.
黄蜂蜇伤患者中降钙素原与急性肾损伤的关联。
Front Physiol. 2023 Aug 28;14:1199063. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2023.1199063. eCollection 2023.
4
Severity of illness and organ dysfunction scoring systems in pediatric critical care: The impacts on clinician's practices and the future.儿科重症监护中的疾病严重程度和器官功能障碍评分系统:对临床医生实践的影响及未来发展
Front Pediatr. 2022 Nov 22;10:1054452. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.1054452. eCollection 2022.
5
Performance of the PRISM I, PIM2, PELOD-2 and PRISM IV scoring systems in western China: a multicenter prospective study.中国西部 PRISM I、PIM2、PELOD-2 和 PRISM IV 评分系统的性能:一项多中心前瞻性研究。
World J Pediatr. 2022 Dec;18(12):818-824. doi: 10.1007/s12519-022-00603-8. Epub 2022 Sep 13.
6
Overall and subgroup specific performance of the pediatric index of mortality 2 score in Switzerland: a national multicenter study.瑞士儿科死亡率 2 评分的总体和亚组特定性能:一项全国多中心研究。
Eur J Pediatr. 2020 Oct;179(10):1515-1521. doi: 10.1007/s00431-020-03639-y. Epub 2020 Apr 1.
7
Novel Insights into Plasmodium vivax Therapeutic Failure: CYP2D6 Activity and Time of Exposure to Malaria Modulate the Risk of Recurrence.新型疟原虫治疗失败见解:CYP2D6 活性和疟疾暴露时间调节复发风险。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020 Apr 21;64(5). doi: 10.1128/AAC.02056-19.
8
A deep learning model for real-time mortality prediction in critically ill children.深度学习模型实时预测危重症儿童死亡率。
Crit Care. 2019 Aug 14;23(1):279. doi: 10.1186/s13054-019-2561-z.
9
A nonparametric updating method to correct clinical prediction model drift.一种修正临床预测模型漂移的非参数更新方法。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Dec 1;26(12):1448-1457. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz127.
10
Comparison of Severity Scoring Systems in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit in India: A Single-Center Prospective, Observational Cohort Study.印度一家儿科重症监护病房中严重程度评分系统的比较:一项单中心前瞻性观察队列研究。
J Pediatr Intensive Care. 2017 Jun;6(2):98-102. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1584811. Epub 2016 Jun 29.