93
John Billings July, 2013 New York University Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service DEVELOPING A NEW PREDICTIVE RISK MODEL

John Billings: Developing a new predictive risk model

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

John Billings

July, 2013

New York University

Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service

DEVELOPING A NEW

PREDICTIVE RISK MODEL

July, 2013

New York University

Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service

DEVELOPING A NEW

PREDICTIVE RISK MODELS

CONTINUING WORK ON

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

– Costs

– Future admissions

– Something else

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

– Avoid “over-fitting”

– Positive predictive value (PPV)

– Sensitivity, receiver operating curve C statistic, etc.

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

– Inpatient

– A&E

– Outpatient

– GP electronic medical records

– Social care information

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

• What variables to use?

– Demographics

– Prior utilization (frequency/recentness)

– Prior cost

– Diagnostic history

– Test results (GP electronic medical records)

– Other stuff (missed appointments, unplanned A&E follow-up visits,

etc)

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

• What variables to use?

• Who is in the denominator?

– Patients with prior emergency admission (PARR)

– Patients with any HES history (inpatient, A&E, outpatient)

– All registered patients

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

• What variables to use?

• Who is in the denominator?

• Can you apply "national" models to local data?

– Do you have to develop your own local model

– Or can you use coefficients from national model

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

• What variables to use?

• Who is in the denominator?

• Can you apply "national" models to local data?

• What interventions work best for high risk patients?

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

• What variables to use?

• Who is in the denominator?

• Can you apply "national" models to local data?

• What interventions work best for high risk patients?

It really

doesn’t

matter

very much

WHAT I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

• What to predict?

• How to assess performance of the model?

• What data bases to use?

• What variables to use?

• Who is in the denominator?

• Can you apply "national" models to local data?

• What interventions work best for high risk patients?

I really have no idea

OUR CONTINUING WORK

• Data from convenience sample of five PCT areas ‒ Cornwall

‒ Croydon

‒ Kent

‒ Newham

‒ Redbridge

OUR CONTINUING WORK

• Data from convenience sample of five PCT areas

• Used four data sets ‒ SUS inpatient

‒ SUS A&E

‒ SUS outpatient

‒ GP electronic medical records

OUR CONTINUING WORK

• Data from convenience sample of five PCT areas

• Used four data sets

• Data are for period August 2007 – September 2010 ‒ Looked back 2 years

‒ Predict admission in next 12 months with 2-month data lage

OUR CONTINUING WORK

• Data from convenience sample of five PCT areas

• Used four data sets

• Data are for period August 2007 – September 2010

• Modeling limited to patients age 18-95

WHAT TO PREDICT?

WHAT TO PREDICT?

• Future costs (non-obstetric)

• Future emergency admissions (or readmissions)

– All non-obstetric

– “Preventable/avoidable” (ambulatory care sensitive)

• Multiple future emergency admissions (or readmissions)

HOW TO ASSESS PERFORMANCE

OF THE MODEL

HOW TO ASSESS PERFORMANCE

OF THE MODEL

• Avoid “over-fitting”

– Develop the model with a 50% sample

– Test the coefficients on the other half

HOW TO ASSESS PERFORMANCE

OF THE MODEL

• Avoid “over-fitting”

– Develop the model with a 50% sample

– Test the coefficients on the other half

• Remember there are tradeoffs between accuracy (as

measured by PPV) and number of patients “flagged” (as

measured by sensitivity)

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

These are results from the “full model”

- Inpatient

- A&E

- Outpatient

- GP electronic medical records

But comparable results for other models

- IP

- IP+A&E

- IP+A&E+OP

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.780

HOW TO ASSESS PERFORMANCE

OF THE MODEL

• Avoid “over-fitting”

– Develop the model with a 50% sample

– Test the coefficients on the other half

• Remember there are tradeoffs between accuracy (as

measured by PPV) and number of patients “flagged” (as

measured by sensitivity)

• For most users, accuracy is likely to be most important (this is not a screening test to identify some dread disease)

– From a “business case” perspective, it is important not to

target patients who will not have a future admission

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000 118 12 16 24

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649 349 35 49 70

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422 645 64 90 129

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303 889 89 125 178

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228 1,107 111 155 221

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176 1,311 131 184 262

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139 1,507 151 211 301

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111 1,690 169 237 338

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090 1,863 186 261 373

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073 2,063 206 289 413

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060 2,270 227 318 454

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048 2,477 248 347 495

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039 2,685 269 376 537

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032 2,926 293 410 585

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026 3,136 314 439 627

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020 3,387 339 474 677

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016 3,765 376 527 753

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012 4,110 411 575 822

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008 4,730 473 662 946

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000 118 12 16 24

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649 349 35 49 70

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422 645 64 90 129

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303 889 89 125 178

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228 1,107 111 155 221

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176 1,311 131 184 262

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139 1,507 151 211 301

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111 1,690 169 237 338

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090 1,863 186 261 373

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073 2,063 206 289 413

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060 2,270 227 318 454

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048 2,477 248 347 495

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039 2,685 269 376 537

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032 2,926 293 410 585

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026 3,136 314 439 627

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020 3,387 339 474 677

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016 3,765 376 527 753

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012 4,110 411 575 822

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008 4,730 473 662 946

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000 118 12 16 24

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649 349 35 49 70

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422 645 64 90 129

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303 889 89 125 178

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228 1,107 111 155 221

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176 1,311 131 184 262

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139 1,507 151 211 301

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111 1,690 169 237 338

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090 1,863 186 261 373

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073 2,063 206 289 413

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060 2,270 227 318 454

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048 2,477 248 347 495

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039 2,685 269 376 537

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032 2,926 293 410 585

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026 3,136 314 439 627

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020 3,387 339 474 677

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016 3,765 376 527 753

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012 4,110 411 575 822

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008 4,730 473 662 946

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Cumulative at Cut-Off Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,836,099 94,692 0.052 1.000 118 12 16 24

5-10 463,346 61,498 0.133 0.649 349 35 49 70

10-15 181,910 39,986 0.220 0.422 645 64 90 129

15-20 101,346 28,697 0.283 0.303 889 89 125 178

20-25 64,821 21,601 0.333 0.228 1,107 111 155 221

25-30 44,142 16,672 0.378 0.176 1,311 131 184 262

30-35 31,653 13,196 0.417 0.139 1,507 151 211 301

35-40 23,360 10,516 0.450 0.111 1,690 169 237 338

40-45 17,747 8,494 0.479 0.090 1,863 186 261 373

45-50 13,564 6,921 0.510 0.073 2,063 206 289 413

50-55 10,545 5,669 0.538 0.060 2,270 227 318 454

55-60 8,157 4,581 0.562 0.048 2,477 248 347 495

60-65 6,360 3,735 0.587 0.039 2,685 269 376 537

65-70 4,911 3,034 0.618 0.032 2,926 293 410 585

70-75 3,806 2,453 0.645 0.026 3,136 314 439 627

75-80 2,885 1,921 0.666 0.020 3,387 339 474 677

80-85 2,124 1,478 0.696 0.016 3,765 376 527 753

85-90 1,567 1,114 0.711 0.012 4,110 411 575 822

90-95 1,022 754 0.738 0.008 4,730 473 662 946

95-100 567 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Within Individual Vigintile Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,339,559 33,194 0.024 0.351 40 4 6 8

5-10 259,924 21,512 0.076 0.227 157 16 22 31

10-15 69,275 11,289 0.140 0.119 337 34 47 67

15-20 29,429 7,096 0.194 0.075 504 50 71 101

20-25 15,750 4,929 0.238 0.052 670 67 94 134

25-30 9,013 3,476 0.278 0.037 815 82 114 163

30-35 5,613 2,680 0.323 0.028 990 99 139 198

35-40 3,591 2,022 0.360 0.021 1,142 114 160 228

40-45 2,610 1,573 0.376 0.017 1,214 121 170 243

45-50 1,767 1,252 0.415 0.013 1,342 134 188 268

50-55 1,300 1,088 0.456 0.011 1,563 156 219 313

55-60 951 846 0.471 0.009 1,738 174 243 348

60-65 748 701 0.484 0.007 1,871 187 262 374

65-70 524 581 0.526 0.006 2,201 220 308 440

70-75 389 532 0.578 0.006 2,351 235 329 470

75-80 318 443 0.582 0.005 2,333 233 327 467

80-85 193 364 0.654 0.004 2,792 279 391 558

85-90 185 360 0.661 0.004 2,948 295 413 590

90-95 138 317 0.697 0.003 3,735 374 523 747

95-100 130 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Within Individual Vigintile Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,339,559 33,194 0.024 0.351 40 4 6 8

5-10 259,924 21,512 0.076 0.227 157 16 22 31

10-15 69,275 11,289 0.140 0.119 337 34 47 67

15-20 29,429 7,096 0.194 0.075 504 50 71 101

20-25 15,750 4,929 0.238 0.052 670 67 94 134

25-30 9,013 3,476 0.278 0.037 815 82 114 163

30-35 5,613 2,680 0.323 0.028 990 99 139 198

35-40 3,591 2,022 0.360 0.021 1,142 114 160 228

40-45 2,610 1,573 0.376 0.017 1,214 121 170 243

45-50 1,767 1,252 0.415 0.013 1,342 134 188 268

50-55 1,300 1,088 0.456 0.011 1,563 156 219 313

55-60 951 846 0.471 0.009 1,738 174 243 348

60-65 748 701 0.484 0.007 1,871 187 262 374

65-70 524 581 0.526 0.006 2,201 220 308 440

70-75 389 532 0.578 0.006 2,351 235 329 470

75-80 318 443 0.582 0.005 2,333 233 327 467

80-85 193 364 0.654 0.004 2,792 279 391 558

85-90 185 360 0.661 0.004 2,948 295 413 590

90-95 138 317 0.697 0.003 3,735 374 523 747

95-100 130 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Within Individual Vigintile Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,339,559 33,194 0.024 0.351 40 4 6 8

5-10 259,924 21,512 0.076 0.227 157 16 22 31

10-15 69,275 11,289 0.140 0.119 337 34 47 67

15-20 29,429 7,096 0.194 0.075 504 50 71 101

20-25 15,750 4,929 0.238 0.052 670 67 94 134

25-30 9,013 3,476 0.278 0.037 815 82 114 163

30-35 5,613 2,680 0.323 0.028 990 99 139 198

35-40 3,591 2,022 0.360 0.021 1,142 114 160 228

40-45 2,610 1,573 0.376 0.017 1,214 121 170 243

45-50 1,767 1,252 0.415 0.013 1,342 134 188 268

50-55 1,300 1,088 0.456 0.011 1,563 156 219 313

55-60 951 846 0.471 0.009 1,738 174 243 348

60-65 748 701 0.484 0.007 1,871 187 262 374

65-70 524 581 0.526 0.006 2,201 220 308 440

70-75 389 532 0.578 0.006 2,351 235 329 470

75-80 318 443 0.582 0.005 2,333 233 327 467

80-85 193 364 0.654 0.004 2,792 279 391 558

85-90 185 360 0.661 0.004 2,948 295 413 590

90-95 138 317 0.697 0.003 3,735 374 523 747

95-100 130 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

TRADE-OFF BETWEEN

ACCURACY AND NUMBER OF CASES

FLAGGED Within Individual Vigintile Level Business Case Analysis - Emergency IP Costs

RiskScore Flagged TruePos PPV SensitivityMean Cost

Next 12 Mos

10%

Reduction

15%

Reduction

20%

Reduction

1-5 1,339,559 33,194 0.024 0.351 40 4 6 8

5-10 259,924 21,512 0.076 0.227 157 16 22 31

10-15 69,275 11,289 0.140 0.119 337 34 47 67

15-20 29,429 7,096 0.194 0.075 504 50 71 101

20-25 15,750 4,929 0.238 0.052 670 67 94 134

25-30 9,013 3,476 0.278 0.037 815 82 114 163

30-35 5,613 2,680 0.323 0.028 990 99 139 198

35-40 3,591 2,022 0.360 0.021 1,142 114 160 228

40-45 2,610 1,573 0.376 0.017 1,214 121 170 243

45-50 1,767 1,252 0.415 0.013 1,342 134 188 268

50-55 1,300 1,088 0.456 0.011 1,563 156 219 313

55-60 951 846 0.471 0.009 1,738 174 243 348

60-65 748 701 0.484 0.007 1,871 187 262 374

65-70 524 581 0.526 0.006 2,201 220 308 440

70-75 389 532 0.578 0.006 2,351 235 329 470

75-80 318 443 0.582 0.005 2,333 233 327 467

80-85 193 364 0.654 0.004 2,792 279 391 558

85-90 185 360 0.661 0.004 2,948 295 413 590

90-95 138 317 0.697 0.003 3,735 374 523 747

95-100 130 437 0.771 0.005 5,529 553 774 1,106

Top 1% 18,363 8,722 0.475 0.092 1,805 181 271 361

Top 5% 91,837 26,991 0.294 0.285 970 97 146 194

ROC C Statistic 0.780

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS)

– Inpatient

– A&E

– Outpatient

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

• How good is the data set?

• How hard is the data set to use?

• Does it improve case finding/accuracy?

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS) – Easy to obtain/relatively standardised

– Inpatient

– A&E

– Outpatient

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS)

– Inpatient – Fairly rich/reasonably accurate/valuable DX/procedure info

– A&E

– Outpatient

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS)

– Inpatient

– A&E – Not so standardised, DX info limited, some procedure info

– Outpatient

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS)

– Inpatient

– A&E

– Outpatient – Very limited (visit volume, missed attendances, spec type)

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS)

– Inpatient

– A&E

– Outpatient

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

- Difficult to obtain (historically)

- Difficult to link (historically)

- Difficult to use - Read code

nightmares

- Not standardised

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE?

• HES (or SUS)

– Inpatient

– A&E

– Outpatient

• GP Electronic Medical Records

• Social care information

- Difficult to obtain (historically)

- Difficult to link (historically)

- Difficult to use

- Not standardised

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

• Additional data sets do improve case finding

– Especially A&E and GP data

– But these improvements are modest

▪ 23% with full data sets at risk score 50+ cut-off

▪ 31% with full data sets at risk score 30+ cut-off

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

+ 455

+ 145

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

+ 455

+ 145

+ 2186

+ 497

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

• Additional data sets do improve case finding

– Especially A&E and GP data

– But these improvements are modest

▪ 23% with full data sets at risk score 50+ cut-off

▪ 31% with full data sets at risk score 30+ cut-off

• There is no loss in predictive accuracy with inclusion of

additional data sets

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

+ 455

+ 145

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

+ 455

+ 145

+ 2186

+ 497

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

• Additional data sets do improve case finding

– Especially A&E and GP data

– But these improvements are modest

▪ 23% with full data sets at risk score 50+ cut-off

▪ 31% with full data sets at risk score 30+ cut-off

• There is no loss in predictive accuracy with inclusion of

additional data sets

• Improved case finding is greatest for lower risk patients

using GP data

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

IP Data IP+AE Data IP+AE+OP Data IP+AE+OP+GP Data

RiskScore TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity TruePos PPV Sensitivity

1-5 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000 94,692 0.052 1.000

5-10 54,450 0.126 0.575 56,117 0.128 0.593 56,438 0.131 0.596 61,498 0.133 0.649

10-15 33,053 0.219 0.349 34,102 0.221 0.360 35,033 0.223 0.370 39,986 0.220 0.422

15-20 22,898 0.285 0.242 23,166 0.293 0.245 24,261 0.290 0.256 28,697 0.283 0.303

20-25 16,181 0.346 0.171 16,915 0.347 0.179 17,719 0.344 0.187 21,601 0.333 0.228

25-30 12,670 0.385 0.134 13,182 0.386 0.139 13,754 0.383 0.145 16,672 0.378 0.176

30-35 10,061 0.421 0.106 10,555 0.422 0.111 11,010 0.419 0.116 13,196 0.417 0.139

35-40 8,130 0.449 0.086 8,600 0.450 0.091 8,986 0.448 0.095 10,516 0.450 0.111

40-45 6,700 0.477 0.071 7,139 0.478 0.075 7,421 0.476 0.078 8,494 0.479 0.090

45-50 5,535 0.501 0.058 5,976 0.504 0.063 6,167 0.499 0.065 6,921 0.510 0.073

50-55 4,627 0.529 0.049 5,027 0.531 0.053 5,172 0.523 0.055 5,669 0.538 0.060

55-60 3,862 0.551 0.041 4,222 0.551 0.045 4,359 0.543 0.046 4,581 0.562 0.048

60-65 3,239 0.574 0.034 3,555 0.569 0.038 3,658 0.567 0.039 3,735 0.587 0.039

65-70 2,711 0.593 0.029 3,012 0.590 0.032 3,041 0.587 0.032 3,034 0.618 0.032

70-75 2,245 0.617 0.024 2,481 0.612 0.026 2,519 0.610 0.027 2,453 0.645 0.026

75-80 1,816 0.634 0.019 2,049 0.639 0.022 2,064 0.631 0.022 1,921 0.666 0.020

80-85 1,418 0.666 0.015 1,662 0.656 0.018 1,646 0.654 0.017 1,478 0.696 0.016

85-90 1,064 0.679 0.011 1,293 0.674 0.014 1,276 0.679 0.013 1,114 0.711 0.012

90-95 769 0.710 0.008 932 0.688 0.010 935 0.702 0.010 754 0.738 0.008

95-100 478 0.748 0.005 592 0.725 0.006 586 0.728 0.006 437 0.771 0.005

Top 1% 8,214 0.447 0.087 8,353 0.455 0.088 8,410 0.458 0.089 8,722 0.475 0.092

Top 5% 24,873 0.271 0.263 25,355 0.276 0.268 25,712 0.280 0.272 26,991 0.294 0.285

ROC C Statistic 0.731 0.745 0.752 0.780

+ 494

+ 400

+ 455

+ 145

+ 2186

+ 497

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

• Additional data sets do improve case finding

– Especially A&E and GP data

– But these improvements are modest

▪ 23% with full data sets at risk score 50+ cut-off

▪ 31% with full data sets at risk score 30+ cut-off

• There is no loss in predictive accuracy with inclusion of

additional data sets

• Improved case finding is greatest for lower risk patients

using GP data

• But it is still difficult to identify patients early in any cycle of

emergency admissions (that first emergency admission)

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

Proportion of Patients

With No Emergency Admissions Prior 2 Years

Risk Score ThresholdIP

Data

IPAE

Data

IPAEOP

Data

IPAEOPGP

Data

Risk Score 50+ 0.3% 1.2% 2.3% 3.2%

Risk Score 30+ 2.7% 4.4% 6.3% 12.4%

Top 1% 1.5% 2.9% 4.2% 6.5%

Top 5% 25.9% 26.4% 26.7% 30.8%

WHAT DATA BASES TO USE? IMPROVING CASE FINDING/ACCURACY

Proportion of Patients

With No Emergency Admissions Prior 2 Years

Risk Score ThresholdIP

Data

IPAE

Data

IPAEOP

Data

IPAEOPGP

Data

Risk Score 50+ 0.3% 1.2% 2.3% 3.2%

Risk Score 30+ 2.7% 4.4% 6.3% 12.4%

Top 1% 1.5% 2.9% 4.2% 6.5%

Top 5% 25.9% 26.4% 26.7% 30.8%

Risk Score Cut-Off Level = 17

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

• Demographics

– Age

– Gender

– IMD (GP practice)

– Months registered at current GP practicre

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

• Demographics

• Inpatient data

– Number of emergency admissions for various periods prior two years

– Number of elective admissions for various periods prior year

– Any day case/night attendance prior year

– History of 16 diagnostic conditions (chronic) prior two years

– Charlson Index

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

• Demographics

• Inpatient data

– Number of emergency admissions for various periods prior two years

– Number of elective admissions for various periods prior year

– Any day case/night attendance prior year

– History of 16 diagnostic conditions (chronic) prior two years

– Charlson Index

Note that we did not use cost as a variable

- Can be difficult to obtain and apply

- Added little, if any, predictive power

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

• Demographics

• Inpatient data

• A&E data

– Number of A&E visits for various periods prior two years

– A&E procedures performed for various periods prior two years

– Unplanned follow-up A&E visits for various periods prior two years

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

• Demographics

• Inpatient data

• A&E data

• Outpatient data

– Number of outpatient visits for various periods prior two years

– Number of outpatient visits missed for various periods prior two years

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

• Demographics

• Inpatient data

• A&E data

• Outpatient data

• GP electronic medical records

– Number long term conditions, specific DX conditions, QOF registries

– Drug prescription history

– BMI, current smoker

– HbA1c, high blood pressure, glomerular filtration rate

– Number of GP visits

– Increase in GP visits last 12 months

– Number of phone consults last 90 days

WHAT VARIABLES TO USE?

A full list of variables used and their definitions

will available imminently at Nuffield website

WHO IS IN THE DENOMINATOR?

WHO IS IN THE DENOMINATOR?

• Patients with prior emergency admissions [PARR]

• Patients with any HES history [inpatient, A&E, outpatient]

• All registered patients

WHO IS IN THE DENOMINATOR?

Demominator Flagged TruePos PPV

Risk Score Cut-Off 50+

Had Emergency Admission Prior 12 Months (PARR) 5,622 3,339 0.594

Any SUS record last 2 years 8,273 4,532 0.548

GP registry population July, 2009 9,892 5,172 0.523

Risk Score Cut-Off 30+

Had Emergency Admission Prior 12 Months (PARR) 19,058 8,818 0.463

Any SUS record last 2 years 24,833 10,671 0.430

GP registry population July, 2009 26,304 11,011 0.419

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

• For each of the five sites:

– We created individual site models

– Created models using the other four sites, and then applied the 4-site

coefficients to local data

– Then compared case finding and accuracy

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

IPOPAE IPOPAEGP

Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression

TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV

Cornwall

Risk Score 50+ 1,041 0.520 754 0.548 1,176 0.545 952 0.556

Risk Score 30+ 2,439 0.406 1,970 0.426 3,032 0.410 2,746 0.411

Croydon

Risk Score 50+ 1,089 0.528 1,192 0.523 1,182 0.550 1,230 0.537

Risk Score 30+ 2,134 0.444 2,258 0.424 2,610 0.442 2,502 0.437

Kent

Risk Score 50+ 1,565 0.513 1,387 0.519 1,736 0.521 1,873 0.493

Risk Score 30+ 3,372 0.401 3,067 0.403 4,079 0.397 4,432 0.369

Newham

Risk Score 50+ 734 0.552 858 0.517 768 0.566 835 0.523

Risk Score 30+ 1,409 0.450 1,564 0.414 1,570 0.439 1,798 0.409

Redbridge

Risk Score 50+ 743 0.512 863 0.495 807 0.522 607 0.519

Risk Score 30+ 1,656 0.420 1,693 0.415 1,905 0.423 1,390 0.436

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

IPOPAE IPOPAEGP

Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression

TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV

Cornwall

Risk Score 50+ 1,041 0.520 754 0.548 1,176 0.545 952 0.556

Risk Score 30+ 2,439 0.406 1,970 0.426 3,032 0.410 2,746 0.411

Croydon

Risk Score 50+ 1,089 0.528 1,192 0.523 1,182 0.550 1,230 0.537

Risk Score 30+ 2,134 0.444 2,258 0.424 2,610 0.442 2,502 0.437

Kent

Risk Score 50+ 1,565 0.513 1,387 0.519 1,736 0.521 1,873 0.493

Risk Score 30+ 3,372 0.401 3,067 0.403 4,079 0.397 4,432 0.369

Newham

Risk Score 50+ 734 0.552 858 0.517 768 0.566 835 0.523

Risk Score 30+ 1,409 0.450 1,564 0.414 1,570 0.439 1,798 0.409

Redbridge

Risk Score 50+ 743 0.512 863 0.495 807 0.522 607 0.519

Risk Score 30+ 1,656 0.420 1,693 0.415 1,905 0.423 1,390 0.436

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

IPOPAE IPOPAEGP

Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression

TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV

Cornwall

Risk Score 50+ 1,041 0.520 754 0.548 1,176 0.545 952 0.556

Risk Score 30+ 2,439 0.406 1,970 0.426 3,032 0.410 2,746 0.411

Croydon

Risk Score 50+ 1,089 0.528 1,192 0.523 1,182 0.550 1,230 0.537

Risk Score 30+ 2,134 0.444 2,258 0.424 2,610 0.442 2,502 0.437

Kent

Risk Score 50+ 1,565 0.513 1,387 0.519 1,736 0.521 1,873 0.493

Risk Score 30+ 3,372 0.401 3,067 0.403 4,079 0.397 4,432 0.369

Newham

Risk Score 50+ 734 0.552 858 0.517 768 0.566 835 0.523

Risk Score 30+ 1,409 0.450 1,564 0.414 1,570 0.439 1,798 0.409

Redbridge

Risk Score 50+ 743 0.512 863 0.495 807 0.522 607 0.519

Risk Score 30+ 1,656 0.420 1,693 0.415 1,905 0.423 1,390 0.436

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

IPOPAE IPOPAEGP

Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression

TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV

Cornwall

Risk Score 50+ 1,041 0.520 754 0.548 1,176 0.545 952 0.556

Risk Score 30+ 2,439 0.406 1,970 0.426 3,032 0.410 2,746 0.411

Croydon

Risk Score 50+ 1,089 0.528 1,192 0.523 1,182 0.550 1,230 0.537

Risk Score 30+ 2,134 0.444 2,258 0.424 2,610 0.442 2,502 0.437

Kent

Risk Score 50+ 1,565 0.513 1,387 0.519 1,736 0.521 1,873 0.493

Risk Score 30+ 3,372 0.401 3,067 0.403 4,079 0.397 4,432 0.369

Newham

Risk Score 50+ 734 0.552 858 0.517 768 0.566 835 0.523

Risk Score 30+ 1,409 0.450 1,564 0.414 1,570 0.439 1,798 0.409

Redbridge

Risk Score 50+ 743 0.512 863 0.495 807 0.522 607 0.519

Risk Score 30+ 1,656 0.420 1,693 0.415 1,905 0.423 1,390 0.436

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

IPOPAE IPOPAEGP

Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression

TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV

Cornwall

Risk Score 50+ 1,041 0.520 754 0.548 1,176 0.545 952 0.556

Risk Score 30+ 2,439 0.406 1,970 0.426 3,032 0.410 2,746 0.411

Croydon

Risk Score 50+ 1,089 0.528 1,192 0.523 1,182 0.550 1,230 0.537

Risk Score 30+ 2,134 0.444 2,258 0.424 2,610 0.442 2,502 0.437

Kent

Risk Score 50+ 1,565 0.513 1,387 0.519 1,736 0.521 1,873 0.493

Risk Score 30+ 3,372 0.401 3,067 0.403 4,079 0.397 4,432 0.369

Newham

Risk Score 50+ 734 0.552 858 0.517 768 0.566 835 0.523

Risk Score 30+ 1,409 0.450 1,564 0.414 1,570 0.439 1,798 0.409

Redbridge

Risk Score 50+ 743 0.512 863 0.495 807 0.522 607 0.519

Risk Score 30+ 1,656 0.420 1,693 0.415 1,905 0.423 1,390 0.436

CAN YOU APPLY “NATIONAL” MODELS

TO LOCAL DATA?

IPOPAE IPOPAEGP

Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression Indiv Site Regression Four Site Regression

TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV TruePos PPV

Cornwall

Risk Score 50+ 1,041 0.520 754 0.548 1,176 0.545 952 0.556

Risk Score 30+ 2,439 0.406 1,970 0.426 3,032 0.410 2,746 0.411

Croydon

Risk Score 50+ 1,089 0.528 1,192 0.523 1,182 0.550 1,230 0.537

Risk Score 30+ 2,134 0.444 2,258 0.424 2,610 0.442 2,502 0.437

Kent

Risk Score 50+ 1,565 0.513 1,387 0.519 1,736 0.521 1,873 0.493

Risk Score 30+ 3,372 0.401 3,067 0.403 4,079 0.397 4,432 0.369

Newham

Risk Score 50+ 734 0.552 858 0.517 768 0.566 835 0.523

Risk Score 30+ 1,409 0.450 1,564 0.414 1,570 0.439 1,798 0.409

Redbridge

Risk Score 50+ 743 0.512 863 0.495 807 0.522 607 0.519

Risk Score 30+ 1,656 0.420 1,693 0.415 1,905 0.423 1,390 0.436

WHAT INTERVENTIONS WORK BEST

FOR HIGH RISK PATIENTS?

WHAT INTERVENTIONS WORK BEST

FOR HIGH RISK PATIENTS?

I really have no idea…

WHAT INTERVENTIONS WORK BEST

FOR HIGH RISK PATIENTS?

Well, actually I have plenty of ideas…

- just no strong evidence on much

WHAT TO DO

• Model development limitations – Predict risks of expensive things you think you do something about

– Don’t stress too much about which data bases (but more are likely better)

– Recognize the trade-offs between model accuracy and sensitivity

WHAT TO DO

• Model development limitations – Predict risks of expensive things you think you do something about

– Don’t stress too much about which data bases (but more are likely better)

– Recognize the trade-offs between model accuracy and sensitivity

• Intervention design – Design the intervention after the risk model has been developed

– Use data from model development to help design the intervention

– Recognize you are probably going to need more information

– Get the incentives right

WHAT TO DO

• Model development limitations – Predict risks of expensive things you think you do something about

– Don’t stress too much about which data bases (but more are likely better)

– Recognize the trade-offs between model accuracy and sensitivity

• Intervention design – Design the intervention after the risk model has been developed

– Use data from model development to help design the intervention

– Recognize you are probably going to need more information

– Get the incentives right

• Intervention implementation – Roll it out in at least quasi-experimental mode

– Track “dosage” levels (who does what to whom and how)

– Avoid enrollment criteria “leakage”

– Evaluate impact of the intervention as rigorously as possible

WHAT TO DO

• Model development limitations – Predict risks of expensive things you think you do something about

– Don’t stress too much about which data bases (but more are likely better)

– Recognize the trade-offs between model accuracy and sensitivity

• Intervention design – Design the intervention after the risk model has been developed

– Use data from model development to help design the intervention

– Recognize you are probably going to need more information

– Get the incentives right

• Intervention implementation – Roll it out in at least quasi-experimental mode

– Track “dosage” levels (who does what to whom and how)

– Avoid enrollment criteria “leakage”

– Evaluate impact of the intervention as rigorously as possible

WHAT TO DO

• Model development limitations – Predict risks of expensive things you think you do something about

– Don’t stress too much about which data bases (but more are likely better)

– Recognize the trade-offs between model accuracy and sensitivity

• Intervention design – Design the intervention after the risk model has been developed

– Use data from model development to help design the intervention

– Recognize you are probably going to need more information

– Get the incentives right

• Intervention implementation – Roll it out in at least quasi-experimental mode

– Track “dosage” levels (who does what to whom and how)

– Avoid enrollment criteria “leakage”

– Evaluate impact of the intervention as rigorously as possible