Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 3;11(8):e044964. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044964

Table 3.

Critical Appraisal of Models that Predict Readmission (CAMPR)

Number Recommendation Studies following recommendation (n) P value*
Overall, n=81
(1985–2015)
Early, n=26
(1985–2010)
Recent, n=55
(2011–2015)
#1 Is the model’s purpose and eligibility criteria explicitly stated? 44 (54%) 11 (42%) 33 (60%) 0.14
#2 Does the model consider common patient-related and institution-related risk factors for readmission? 1 (1%) 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0.33
#3 Does the model consider competing risks to readmission, particularly mortality? 68 (84%) 23 (88%) 45 (82%) 0.43
#4 Does the model identify how providers may intervene to prevent readmission? 4 (5%) 3 (12%) 1 (2%) 0.15
#5 Does the model consider recent changes in the patient’s condition? 39 (48%) 6 (23%) 33 (60%) 0.001**
#6 Is the model’s timeframe an appropriate trade-off between sensitivity and statistical power? 12 (15%) 4 (15%) 8 (15%) 0.92
#7 Does the model exclude either planned or unavoidable readmissions? 42 (52%) 12 (46%) 30 (55%) 0.49
#8 Is the model equipped to handle missing data and is missingness in the development datasets reported? 13 (16%) 4 (15%) 9 (16%) 0.91
#9 Is preprocessing discussed and does the model avoid problematic preprocessing, particularly binning? 27 (33%) 9 (35%) 18 (33%) 0.96
#10 Does the model make use of all available data sources to improve performance? 59 (73%) 15 (58%) 44 (80%) 0.05
#11 Does the model use electronically available data rather than relying on manual data entry? 55 (68%) 17 (65%) 38 (69%) 0.75
#12 Does the model rely on data available in sufficient quantity and quality for prediction? 58 (72%) 18 (69%) 40 (73%) 0.75
#13 Is the model internally validated using cross-validation or a similarly rigorous method? 4 (5%) 1 (4%) 3 (5%) 0.75
#14 Is the model’s discrimination reported and compared with known models where appropriate? 74 (91%) 21 (81%) 53 (96%) 0.07
#15 Is the model calibrated if needed and is calibration reported? 47 (58%) 14 (54%) 33 (60%) 0.61

*Significant at p=0.05; **significant at p=0.001.

*Comparison is between models published earlier (1985–2010) and more recently (2011–2015).