Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Transfer patient characteristics, and mortality rates for the development phase of SafeNET.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Completeness of data and respective values for patient variables that have the most important variables predictive of mortality by mortality status.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 1.

Comparison of discrimination and calibration during model development.

Calibration plots and discrimination outcomes of guided machine learning are displayed for models using all 54 patient variables (A-D) vs. the top 14 most important variables (E-H) to predict in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality and CMO/hospice transition among hospital transfer patients.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Comparison of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for SafeNET and qSOFA.

The ROC curves and discrimination of the SafeNET (Safe Nonelective Emergent Transfers) and qSOFA (quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) models are displayed.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

SafeNET compliance over time by hospital facility.

Compliance rates are displayed during a 7-month pilot period (A) and broken down by participating facility (B).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Discrimination and calibration of SafeNET models for predicting mortality.

Validation of SafeNET for predicting in-hospital (A,D), 30-day (B,E), and 90-day (C,F) mortality among transfer patients is shown.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 3.

Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of prospectively measured SafeNET score at a threshold of 20% mortality.

More »

Table 3 Expand