The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mortality Probability Models (MPM II) Based on an International Cohort of Intensive Care Unit Patients
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To revise and update models in the Mortality Probability Model (MPM II) system to estimate the probability of hospital mortality among 19,124 intensive care unit (ICU) patients that can be used for quality assessment within and among ICUs. DESIGN AND SETTING: Models developed and validated on consecutive admissions to adult medical and surgical ICUs in 12 countries. PATIENTS: A total of 12,610 patients for model development, 6514 patients for model validation. Patients younger than 18 years and burn, coronary care, and cardiac surgery patients were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURE: Vital status at hospital discharge. RESULTS: The admission model, MPM0, contains 15 readily obtainable variables. In developmental and validation samples it calibrated well (goodness-of-fit tests: P = .623 and P = .327, respectively, where a high P value represents good fit between observed and expected values) and discriminated well (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.837 and 0.824, respectively). The 24-hour model, MPM24 (developed on 10,357 patients still in the ICU at 24 hours), contains five of the admission variables and eight additional variables easily ascertained at 24 hours. It also calibrated well (P = .764 and P = .231 in the developmental and validation samples, respectively) and discriminated well (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.844 and 0.836 in the developmental and validation samples, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among severity systems for intensive care patients, the MPM0 is the only model available for use at ICU admission. Both MPM0 and MPM24 are useful research tools and provide important clinical information when used alone or together.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Self-citation
Cited by
Le Gall, J.-R. (1993) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.270.24.2957 · Cited by 7,773
Zimmerman, J. E., Kramer, A. A., McNair, D. S., & Malila, F. M. (2006) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000215112.84523.f0 · Cited by 1,764
Chalfin, D. B., Trzeciak, S., Likourezos, A., Baumann, B. M., & Dellinger, R. P. (2007) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000266585.74905.5a · Cited by 1,022
Kramer, A. A., & Zimmerman, J. E. (2007) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000275267.64078.b0 · Cited by 886
Clinical review: Scoring systems in the critically ill
Vincent, J.-L., & Moreno, R. (2010) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc8204 · Cited by 634
Nguyen, H. B., Corbett, S. W., Steele, R., Banta, J., Clark, R. T., Hayes, S. R., Edwards, J., Cho, T. W., & Wittlake, W. A. (2007) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000259463.33848.3d · Cited by 555
Pirracchio, R., Petersen, M. L., Carone, M., Rigon, M. R., Chevret, S., & van der Laan, M. J. (2015) · The Lancet Respiratory Medicine · doi:10.1016/s2213-2600(14)70239-5 · Cited by 374
Thorsen-Meyer, H.-C., Nielsen, A. B., Nielsen, A. P., Kaas-Hansen, B. S., Toft, P., Schierbeck, J., Strøm, T., Chmura, P. J., Heimann, M., Dybdahl, L., et al. (2020) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(20)30018-2 · Cited by 336
Impact of Body Mass Index on Outcomes Following Critical Care
Tremblay, A., & Bandi, V. (2003) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.123.4.1202 · Cited by 318
Dybowski, R., Gant, V, Weller, P., & Chang, R. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)90609-1 · Cited by 240
Awad, A., Bader-El-Den, M., McNicholas, J., & Briggs, J. (2017) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.10.002 · Cited by 208
The Intervention Selection Bias: An Underrecognized Confound in Intervention Research.
Larzelere, R. E., Kuhn, B. R., & Johnson, B. (2004) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.2.289 · Cited by 144
Arts, D., de Keizer, N., Scheffer, G.-J., & de Jonge, E. (2002) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-002-1272-z · Cited by 134
Kim, S., Kim, W., & Park, R. W. (2011) · Healthcare Informatics Research · doi:10.4258/hir.2011.17.4.232 · Cited by 132
Patient length of stay and mortality prediction: A survey
Awad, A., Bader–El–Den, M., & McNicholas, J. (2017) · Health Services Management Research · doi:10.1177/0951484817696212 · Cited by 128
Peek, N., Arts, D. G. T., Bosman, R. J., van der Voort, P. H. J., & de Keizer, N. F. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.08.011 · Cited by 92
Validation of a Retrospective Computing Model for Mortality Risk in the Intensive Care Unit
Tan, E. M., Kashyap, R., Olson, I. C., & O’Horo, J. C. (2020) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes · doi:10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2020.09.001 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Lemeshow, S.
- Venue
- JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1993-11-24
- Volume
- 270
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 2478
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2067747050
- Cited by
- 1,029
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
