The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-133) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
JN conceived the idea, analysed the DAVROS data, and drafted the manuscript. RJ helped conceive the idea, analysed the HES data, and helped revise the manuscript. MJC helped conceive the idea, and revise the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Comparison of outcomes between populations or centres may be confounded by any casemix differences and standardisation is carried out to avoid this. However, when the casemix adjustment models are large and complex, direct standardisation has been described as “practically impossible”, and indirect standardisation may lead to unfair comparisons. We propose a new method of directly standardising for risk rather than standardising for casemix which overcomes these problems.
Using a casemix model which is the same model as would be used in indirect standardisation, the risk in individuals is estimated. Risk categories are defined, and event rates in each category for each centre to be compared are calculated. A weighted sum of the risk category specific event rates is then calculated. We have illustrated this method using data on 6 million admissions to 146 hospitals in England in 2007/8 and an existing model with over 5000 casemix combinations, and a second dataset of 18,668 adult emergency admissions to 9 centres in the UK and overseas and a published model with over 20,000 casemix combinations and a continuous covariate.
Substantial differences between conventional directly casemix standardised rates and rates from direct risk standardisation (DRS) were found. Results based on DRS were very similar to Standardised Mortality Ratios (SMRs) obtained from indirect standardisation, with similar standard errors.
Direct risk standardisation using our proposed method is as straightforward as using conventional direct or indirect standardisation, always enables fair comparisons of performance to be made, can use continuous casemix covariates, and was found in our examples to have similar standard errors to the SMR. It should be preferred when there is a risk that conventional direct or indirect standardisation will lead to unfair comparisons.
Additional file 1: Appendix. It contains technical formulae for the calculation of the DRS rates, SMR, and their standard errors. (DOCX 18 KB)12874_2013_1003_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Authors’ original file for figure 112874_2013_1003_MOESM2_ESM.tif
Authors’ original file for figure 212874_2013_1003_MOESM3_ESM.tif
Authors’ original file for figure 312874_2013_1003_MOESM4_ESM.tif
Authors’ original file for figure 412874_2013_1003_MOESM5_ESM.tif
Rothman KJ: Modern epidemiology. 1986, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company
Breslow NE, Day NE: Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume II - The design and analysis of cohort studies. 1987, Oxford: Oxford University Press
- Direct risk standardisation: a new method for comparing casemix adjusted event rates using complex models
Richard M Jacques
Michael J Campbell
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet AINS
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet AINS
e.Med Kampagnen-Visual, Mail Icon II