IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0102297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fixed Effects Modelling for Provider Mortality Outcomes: Analysis of the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Adult Patient Data-Base

Author

Listed:
  • John L Moran
  • Patricia J Solomon
  • for the ANZICS Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation (CORE) of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS)

Abstract

Background: Risk adjusted mortality for intensive care units (ICU) is usually estimated via logistic regression. Random effects (RE) or hierarchical models have been advocated to estimate provider risk-adjusted mortality on the basis that standard estimators increase false outlier classification. The utility of fixed effects (FE) estimators (separate ICU-specific intercepts) has not been fully explored. Methods: Using a cohort from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database, 2009–2010, the model fit of different logistic estimators (FE, random-intercept and random-coefficient) was characterised: Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC; lower values better), receiver-operator characteristic curve area (AUC) and Hosmer-Lemeshow (H-L) statistic. ICU standardised hospital mortality ratios (SMR) and 95%CI were compared between models. ICU site performance (FE), relative to the grand observation-weighted mean (GO-WM) on odds ratio (OR), risk ratio (RR) and probability scales were assessed using model-based average marginal effects (AME). Results: The data set consisted of 145355 patients in 128 ICUs, years 2009 (47.5%) & 2010 (52.5%), with mean(SD) age 60.9(18.8) years, 56% male and ICU and hospital mortalities of 7.0% and 10.9% respectively. The FE model had a BIC = 64058, AUC = 0.90 and an H-L statistic P-value = 0.22. The best-fitting random-intercept model had a BIC = 64457, AUC = 0.90 and H-L statistic P-value = 0.32 and random-coefficient model, BIC = 64556, AUC = 0.90 and H-L statistic P-value = 0.28. Across ICUs and over years no outliers (SMR 95% CI excluding null-value = 1) were identified and no model difference in SMR spread or 95%CI span was demonstrated. Using AME (OR and RR scale), ICU site-specific estimates diverged from the GO-WM, and the effect spread decreased over calendar years. On the probability scale, a majority of ICUs demonstrated calendar year decrease, but in the for-profit sector, this trend was reversed. Conclusions: The FE estimator had model advantage compared with conventional RE models. Using AME, between and over-year ICU site-effects were easily characterised.

Suggested Citation

  • John L Moran & Patricia J Solomon & for the ANZICS Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation (CORE) of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS), 2014. "Fixed Effects Modelling for Provider Mortality Outcomes: Analysis of the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Adult Patient Data-Base," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0102297
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102297
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102297&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0102297?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guihua Wang & Jun Li & Wallace J. Hopp & Franco L. Fazzalari & Steven F. Bolling, 2019. "Using Patient-Specific Quality Information to Unlock Hidden Healthcare Capabilities," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 582-601, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0102297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.