Mortality prediction models hold substantial promise as tools for pati
ent management, quality assessment, and, perhaps, health care resource
allocation planning. Yet relatively little is known about the predict
ive validity of these models. We report here a comparison of the cross
-validation performance of seven statistical models of patient mortali
ty: (1) ordinary-least-squares (OLS) regression predicting 0/1 death s
tatus six months after admission; (2) logistic regression; (3) Cox reg
ression; (4-6) three unit-weight models derived from the logistic regr
ession, and (7) a recursive partitioning classification technique (CAR
T). We calculated the following performance statistics for each model
in both a learning and test sample of patients, all of whom were drawn
from a nationally representative sample of 2558 Medicare patients wit
h acute myocardial infarction: overall accuracy in predicting six-mont
h mortality, sensitivity and specificity rates, positive and negative
predictive values, and per cent improvement in accuracy rates and erro
r rates over model-free predictions (i.e., predictions that make no us
e of available independent variables). We developed ROC curves based o
n logistic regression, the best unit-weight model, the single best pre
dictor variable, and a series of CART models generated by varying the
misclassification cost specifications. In our sample, the models reduc
ed model-free error rates at the patient level by 8-22 per cent in the
test sample. We found that the performance of the logistic regression
models was marginally superior to that of other models. The areas und
er the ROC curves for the best models ranged from 0.61 to 0.63. Overal
l predictive accuracy for the best models may be adequate to support a
ctivities such as quality assessment that involve aggregating over lar
ge groups of patients, but the extent to which these models may be app
ropriately applied to patient-level resource allocation planning is le
ss clear.