Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May 18;22(1):434.
doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03126-z.

Do functional status and Medicare claims data improve the predictive accuracy of an electronic health record mortality index? Findings from a national Veterans Affairs cohort

Affiliations

Do functional status and Medicare claims data improve the predictive accuracy of an electronic health record mortality index? Findings from a national Veterans Affairs cohort

William James Deardorff et al. BMC Geriatr. .

Abstract

Background: Electronic health record (EHR) prediction models may be easier to use in busy clinical settings since EHR data can be auto-populated into models. This study assessed whether adding functional status and/or Medicare claims data (which are often not available in EHRs) improves the accuracy of a previously developed Veterans Affairs (VA) EHR-based mortality index.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of veterans aged 75 years and older enrolled in VA primary care clinics followed from January 2014 to April 2020 (n = 62,014). We randomly split participants into development (n = 49,612) and validation (n = 12,402) cohorts. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We performed logistic regression with backward stepwise selection to develop a 100-predictor base model using 854 EHR candidate variables, including demographics, laboratory values, medications, healthcare utilization, diagnosis codes, and vitals. We incorporated functional measures in a base + function model by adding activities of daily living (range 0-5) and instrumental activities of daily living (range 0-7) scores. Medicare data, including healthcare utilization (e.g., emergency department visits, hospitalizations) and diagnosis codes, were incorporated in a base + Medicare model. A base + function + Medicare model included all data elements. We assessed model performance with the c-statistic, reclassification metrics, fraction of new information provided, and calibration plots.

Results: In the overall cohort, mean age was 82.6 years and 98.6% were male. At the end of follow-up, 30,263 participants (48.8%) had died. The base model c-statistic was 0.809 (95% CI 0.805-0.812) in the development cohort and 0.804 (95% CI 0.796-0.812) in the validation cohort. Validation cohort c-statistics for the base + function, base + Medicare, and base + function + Medicare models were 0.809 (95% CI 0.801-0.816), 0.811 (95% CI 0.803-0.818), and 0.814 (95% CI 0.807-0.822), respectively. Adding functional status and Medicare data resulted in similarly small improvements among other model performance measures. All models showed excellent calibration.

Conclusions: Incorporation of functional status and Medicare data into a VA EHR-based mortality index led to small but likely clinically insignificant improvements in model performance.

Keywords: Functional status; Medicare data; Mortality prediction model; Physical function.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no competing interests. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Veterans Affairs or the United States government.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Number of predictor variables selected within each of the 100 variable models. Abbreviations: c-statistic, concordance statistic; EHR, electronic health record. * For the base model and base + function model, diagnoses codes were obtained only from Veterans Affairs electronic health record data. For the base + Medicare and base + function + Medicare models, diagnosis codes were obtained from the Veterans Affairs electronic health record and Medicare sources

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lee SJ, Kim CM. Individualizing prevention for older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;66:229–234. doi: 10.1111/jgs.15216. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Walter LC, Covinsky KE. Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making. JAMA. 2001;285:2750–2756. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.21.2750. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yourman LC, Lee SJ, Schonberg MA, Widera EW, Smith AK. Prognostic indices for older adults: a systematic review. JAMA. 2012;307:182–192. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1966. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Redelmeier DA, Lustig AJ. Prognostic indices in clinical practice. JAMA. 2001;285:3024–3025. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.23.3024. - DOI - PubMed
    1. ePrognosis. https://eprognosis.ucsf.edu/. Accessed 5 Apr 2022.

Publication types