 |
|
Controlling for Patient Risk in Volume-Outcome Studies
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Nallamothu et al1 concluded that differences in in-hospital mortality rates between low- and high-volume centers rose as the expected risk of in-hospital death increased. However, the predicted risk for each patient was derived from a risk prediction model that excluded volume as an explanatory variable. The coefficient for any risk factor that is correlated with volume in this risk prediction model is subject to omitted variable bias.2 For example, the authors noted that patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting at low-volume centers were older on average. Therefore, the described risk prediction model will mistakenly assign some of the lower mortality associated with high volume to the age variable because patients at high-volume hospitals are younger on average, and the association between volume and mortality is negative. The risk prediction model therefore systematically underestimates the association between risk factors and mortality for characteristics more prevalent in low-volume hospitals and overestimates these . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Vivian Ho, PhD
RELATED ARTICLES
Controlling for Patient Risk in Volume-Outcome Studies—Reply
Brahmajee K. Nallamothu, Timothy P. Hofer, and Steven J. Bernstein
Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(14):1664.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Impact of Patient Risk on the Hospital Volume–Outcome Relationship in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Brahmajee K. Nallamothu, Sanjay Saint, Timothy P. Hofer, Sandeep Vijan, Kim A. Eagle, and Steven J. Bernstein
Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(3):333-337.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
