Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.southwesthealthcare.com.au/swhealthcarejspui/handle/1/3834
Journal Title: Modelling hospital outcome: problems with endogeneity
Authors: Moran, John L.
Santamaria, John D.
Duke, Graeme J.
The Australian & New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Centre for Outcomes & Resource Evaluation (CORE)
Keywords: Endogeneity
Outcome Analysis
Hospital
Issue Date: 21-Jun-2021
Publisher: BMC : Part of Springer Nature
Date Accessioned: 2023-04-17T05:20:45Z
Date Available: 2023-04-17T05:20:45Z
Url: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01251-8
Description Affiliation: The Australian & New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Centre for Outcomes & Resource Evaluation (CORE)
Source Volume: 21
Issue Number: 124
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01251-8
Date: 2021
Abstract: Background Mortality modelling in the critical care paradigm traditionally uses logistic regression, despite the availability of estimators commonly used in alternate disciplines. Little attention has been paid to covariate endogeneity and the status of non-randomized treatment assignment. Using a large registry database, various binary outcome modelling strategies and methods to account for covariate endogeneity were explored. Methods Patient mortality data was sourced from the Australian & New Zealand Intensive Society Adult Patient Database for 2016. Hospital mortality was modelled using logistic, probit and linear probability (LPM) models with intensive care (ICU) providers as fixed (FE) and random (RE) effects. Model comparison entailed indices of discrimination and calibration, information criteria (AIC and BIC) and binned residual analysis. Suspect covariate and ventilation treatment assignment endogeneity was identified by correlation between predictor variable and hospital mortality error terms, using the Stata™ “eprobit” estimator. Marginal effects were used to demonstrate effect estimate differences between probit and “eprobit” models. Results The cohort comprised 92,693 patients from 124 intensive care units (ICU) in calendar year 2016. Patients mean age was 61.8 (SD 17.5) years, 41.6% were female and APACHE III severity of illness score 54.5(25.6); 43.7% were ventilated. Of the models considered in predicting hospital mortality, logistic regression (with or without ICU FE) and RE logistic regression dominated, more so the latter using information criteria indices. The LPM suffered from many predictions outside the unit [0,1] interval and both poor discrimination and calibration. Error terms of hospital length of stay, an independent risk of death score and ventilation status were correlated with the mortality error term. Marked differences in the ventilation mortality marginal effect was demonstrated between the probit and the "eprobit" models which were scenario dependent. Endogeneity was not demonstrated for the APACHE III score. Conclusions Logistic regression accounting for provider effects was the preferred estimator for hospital mortality modelling. Endogeneity of covariates and treatment variables may be identified using appropriate modelling, but failure to do so yields problematic effect estimates.
URI: https://repository.southwesthealthcare.com.au/swhealthcarejspui/handle/1/3834
Journal Title: BMC Medical Research Methodology
ISSN: 1471-2288
Type: Journal Article
Appears in Collections:SWH Data Contributions



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing