Skip to main content

Table 3 Evaluation of clinical models for predicting hospitalisation-associated functional decline

From: Predicting hospitalisation-associated functional decline in older patients admitted to a cardiac care unit with cardiovascular disease: a prospective cohort study

Model evaluationPrediction models
Developed modelInouye et al. 1993Mehta, et al. 2011bSager et al. 1996
OR (95% CI)1.12 (1.08–1.17)2.44 (1.56–3.81)1.26 (1.12–1.41)1.62 (1.24–2.12)
Discrimination a0.75 (0.68–0.83)0.67 (0.59–0.74)0.68 (0.61–0.76)0.65 (0.57–0.73)
CalibrationChi2 = 6.35, p = 0.499 cChi2 = 0.11, p = 0.948 dChi2 = 11.80, p = 0.0667 eChi2 = 11.80, p = 0.0667 f
Clinical usefulnessCutoff value = 13
Sensitivity = 71%
Specificity = 70%
PPV = 54%
NPV = 83%
Correctly classified = 70%
Cutoff value = 1
Sensitivity = 46.0%
Specificity = 80.2%
PPV = 54%
NPV = 75%
Correctly classified = 69%
Cutoff value = 4
Sensitivity = 65%
Specificity = 60%
PPV = 45%
NPV = 78%
Correctly classified = 62%
Cutoff value = 4
Sensitivity = 60%
Specificity = 61%
PPV = 44%
NPV = 76%
Correctly classified = 61%
  1. Abbreviations: PPV Positive Predictive value, NPV Negative Predictive Value, CI Confidence Interval;
  2. a Discrimination was assessed using the C-index, and models were compared using the chi2 test for equality for two or more Receiver Operating Characteristic areas: chi2 = 12.8, p = 0.005;
  3. b Sensitivity analysis for Mehta et al. 2011 using a complete case analysis instead of multiple imputation: OR = 1.18 (1.03–1.36); Discrimination: 0.63, 95% CI (0.54–0.73); Calibration: chi2 = 4.27, p = 0.640;
  4. Calibration was assessed using the Hosmer – Lemeshow goodness of fit test. The goodness of fit could only be assessed in quantiles of c 9 groups, d 4 groups, e 8 groups and f 5 groups because of ties in the data;
\