CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 214Frailty in Older AdultsAging, Health, and DisabilityChronic Disease Management Strategies

Index to Predict 5-Year Mortality of Community-Dwelling Adults Aged 65 and Older Using Data from the National Health Interview Survey

Open access
Schonberg, Mara A., Davis, Roger B., McCarthy, Ellen P., Marcantonio, Edward R.·2009·Journal of General Internal Medicine
DOI 10.1007/s11606-009-1073-yPMC PMC2762505
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background Prognostic information is becoming increasingly important for clinical decision-making.Objective To develop and validate an index to predict 5-year mortality among community-dwelling older adults.Design and participants A total of 24,115 individuals aged >65 who responded to the 1997-2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) with follow-up through 31 December 2002 from the National Death Index; 16,077 were randomly selected for the development cohort and 8,038 for the validation cohort.Measurements 39 risk factors (functional measures, illnesses, behaviors, demographics) were included in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to determine factors independently associated with mortality. Risk scores were calculated for participants using points derived from the final model's beta coefficients. To evaluate external validity, we compared survival by quintile of risk between the development and validation cohorts.Results Seventeen percent of participants had died by the end of the study. The final model included 11 variables: age (1 point for 70-74 up to 7 points for >85); male: 3 points; BMI <25: 2 points; perceived health (good: 1 point, fair/poor: 2 points); emphysema: 2 points; cancer: 2 points; diabetes: 2 points; dependent in instrumental activities of daily living: 2 points; difficulty walking: 3 points; smoker-former: 1 point, smoker-current: 3 points; past year hospitalizations-one: 1 point, >2: 3 points. We observed close agreement between 5-year mortality in the two cohorts; which ranged from 5% in the lowest risk quintile to 50% in the highest risk quintile in the validation cohort.Conclusions This validated mortality index can be used to account for participant life expectancy in analyses using NHIS data.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-009-1073-y

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mortality prediction models that account for variables such as comorbidities and functional status can serve as the basis for making more refined life expectancy estimates.

    “Mortality prediction models that account for variables such as comorbidities and functional status can serve as the basis for making more refined life expectancy estimates107–109.”

    From Diabetes in Older Adults: A Consensus Report (2012) · cites this paper as [109]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Schonberg MA, Marcantonio ER, Wee CC. Receipt of exercise counsel- ing among older women. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(4):619-26.
  2. Horm J. Multiple causes of death for the national health interview survey. Record linkage techniques-Proceedings of an International Workshop and Exposition, 1997: National Research Council, Washington D.C., 1997.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Schonberg, M. A., Davis, R. B., McCarthy, E. P., & Marcantonio, E. R.
Affiliations
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Schonberg, Mara A.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2009-08-01
Volume
24
Issue
10
Pages
1115-1122
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
DOI
10.1007/s11606-009-1073-y
PMC
PMC2762505
OpenAlex
W2069211921
Cited by
214
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 14
Type
paratext
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (K23AG028584)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
Keywords
mortality prediction, older adults, community-dwelling adults, 5-year mortality, risk score, prognostic factors, functional status, instrumental activities of daily living, health perception, emphysema, diabetes mellitus, cancer, smoking, hospitalization, life expectancy, National Health Interview Survey
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Forecasting, Health Status Indicators, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Mortality, Residence Characteristics, Statistics as Topic, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Survival Rate

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