Back

Evaluation of SOFA-2 Score Performance Across Demographic Subgroups: An External Validation Study Using MIMIC-IV

Ellen, J. G.; Hao, S.; Gao, C. A.; Arias, M. D. P.; Viola, M.; Wong, A.-K. I.; Mattie, H.; Parker, W.; Haidau, C.; Matos, J.; Chaves, R. C. d. F.; Celi, L. A.

2026-03-11 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.64898/2026.03.10.26348061 medRxiv
Show abstract

The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-2 score was recently validated for ICU mortality prediction across more than 3 million admissions but was not evaluated across demographic subgroups. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of the SOFA-2 score for ICU mortality across subgroups defined by age, sex, race and ethnicity, primary language, and insurance status. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients (aged 18 years or older) admitted to ICUs at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2008 and 2022 (MIMIC-IV, version 3.1), selecting the first ICU admission per patient. First-day SOFA-2 scores (range, 0-24) were calculated using worst recorded values across 6 organ systems. Discrimination was assessed using AUROC, calibration using intercepts and slopes, and subgroup differences using bootstrap resampling. Among 64,015 ICU admissions (median age, 66 years [IQR, 54-78]; 56.1% male; 66.1% White), overall ICU mortality was 7.2% (n=4,596). Overall AUROC was acceptable at 0.77 (95% CI, 0.76-0.77). Notably, discrimination declined significantly with age: AUROC was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.87) for ages 18-44 and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for ages 75 and older (difference in AUROC, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.16 to -0.11), with systematic underprediction of mortality in older patients (calibration intercept, 0.39). Discrimination was also significantly lower among non-English speakers (difference in AUROC, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01) but did not differ significantly across documented racial and ethnic groups. Patients with unknown race/ethnicity (14.3% of the cohort) had nearly double the overall mortality rate and poor calibration. SOFA-2 demonstrated good overall performance for ICU mortality prediction but with clinically meaningful variation across demographic subgroups, particularly a substantial decline in discrimination with advancing age. These findings underscore the need for routine equity evaluation of clinical prediction tools before widespread implementation.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Critical Care Explorations
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.0%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.3%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.3%
4
Critical Care
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.7%
6
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.7%
7
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.5%
8
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
9
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
10
Neurocritical Care
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
11
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
12
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
13
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
14
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
The Lancet
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
16
Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
17
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
18
Aging
69 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
21
Journal of Internal Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
22
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
23
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
24
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
25
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
26
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
27
Physiological Measurement
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
30
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%