Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 16, 2025

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability
Neeloofar Soleimanpour1, Maralyssa Bann2,3
1Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, Colorado, United States of America.
Introduction:
Clinical prediction and decision tools that generate outcome-based risk stratification and/or intervention recommendations are prevalent. Appropriate use and validity of these tools, especially those that inform complex clinical decisions, remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the methodologic quality and applicability of clinical risk scoring tools used to guide hospitalization decision-making.
Methods:
In February 2021, a comprehensive search was performed of a clinical calculator online database (mdcalc.com) that is publicly available and well-known to clinicians. The primary reference for any calculator tool informing outpatient versus inpatient disposition was considered for inclusion. Studies were restricted to the adult, acute care population. Those focused on obstetrics/gynecology or critical care admission were excluded. The Wasson-Laupacis framework of methodologic standards for clinical prediction rules was applied to each study.
Results:
A total of 22 calculators provided hospital admission recommendations for 9 discrete medical conditions using adverse events (14/22), mortality (6/22), or confirmatory diagnosis (2/22) as outcomes of interest. The most commonly met methodologic standards included mathematical technique description (22/22) and clinical sensibility (22/22) and least commonly met included reproducibility of the rule (1/22) and measurement of effect on clinical use (1/22). Description of the studied population was often lacking, especially patient race/ethnicity (2/22) and mental or behavioral health (0/22). Only one study reported any item related to social determinants of health.
Conclusion:
Studies commonly do not meet rigorous methodologic standards and often fail to report pertinent details that would guide applicability. These clinical tools focus primarily on specific disease entities and clinical variables, missing the breadth of information necessary to make a disposition determination and raise significant validation and generalizability concerns.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Actuarial Approach
Consider the example of a high-risk surgical procedure with significant early-stage mortality. A two-year clinical study is conducted,...
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
Relative Risk
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Kaplan-Meier Approach

