A combined comorbidity score predicted mortality in elderly patients better than existing scores
Open accessAbstract
Objective To develop and validate a single numerical comorbidity score for predicting short- and long-term mortality, by combining conditions in the Charlson and Elixhauser measures.Study design and setting In a cohort of 120,679 Pennsylvania Medicare enrollees with drug coverage through a pharmacy assistance program, we developed a single numerical comorbidity score for predicting 1-year mortality, by combining the conditions in the Charlson and Elixhauser measures. We externally validated the combined score in a cohort of New Jersey Medicare enrollees, by comparing its performance to that of both component scores in predicting 1-year mortality, as well as 180-, 90-, and 30-day mortality.Results C-statistics from logistic regression models including the combined score were higher than corresponding c-statistics from models including either the Romano implementation of the Charlson Index or the single numerical version of the Elixhauser system; c-statistics were 0.860 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.854, 0.866), 0.839 (95% CI: 0.836, 0.849), and 0.836 (95% CI: 0.834, 0.847), respectively, for the 30-day mortality outcome. The combined comorbidity score also yielded positive values for two recently proposed measures of reclassification.Conclusion In similar populations and data settings, the combined score may offer improvements in comorbidity summarization over existing scores.
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
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.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 995
- Authors
- Gagne, J. J., Glynn, R. J., Avorn, J., Levin, R., & Schneeweiss, S.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gagne, Joshua J.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-07
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 749-759
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3100405
- OpenAlex
- W2087018232
- Cited by
- 995
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 54 · 2025: 74 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 81 · 2022: 83 · 2021: 84 · 2020: 116 · 2019: 94 · 2018: 74 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 14.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (1r01lm010213-01)
- National Institute on Aging (T32AG000158, R56AG018833, R01AG018833)
- U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01-LM10213, R01-LM010213)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
- Keywords
- comorbidity index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Elixhauser comorbidity index, mortality prediction, elderly patients, Medicare enrollees, short-term mortality, long-term mortality, reclassification, risk prediction model validation
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Mortality, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Predictive Value of Tests, Cohort Studies, Comorbidity, Logistic Models, Hospital Mortality, Risk Adjustment
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