OSPITALS VARY WIDELY INquality of critical care. 1 Consequently, the outcomes of critically ill patients may be improved by concentrating care at more experienced centers. [1][2][3] By centralizing patients who are at greater risk of mortality in referral hospitals, regionalized care in critical illness may achieve improvements in outcome similar to trauma networks. 4 In 2006, the Institute of Medicine called for a regionalized, coordinated system of emergency care for high-risk patients, 5 one in which patients in most need of highintensity acute care are distributed to centers with the greatest expertise in caring for the critically ill.Current out-of-hospital triage of noninjured, critically ill patients uses dispatch criteria, 6 subjective emergency medical services (EMS) assessments, 7,8 coordination by medical command officers, 9 and patient preference. 10 In specific conditions such as coronary artery disease and stroke, out-of-hospital care providers use objective tools to triage and risk-stratify prehospital patients for early treatment and choice of destination. [11][12][13] However, these subjective and disease-specific assessments alone may not be sufficient for triage in general populations at risk of critical ill-ness. 8,[14][15][16] Future development of regionalized systems of acute care will require objective, routinely measured predictors that are associated with important clinical end points in a heterogeneous population. An objective triage tool may also identify patients for early treatment by out-of-hospital care providers.We sought to develop a tool for prediction of critical illness during out-ofhospital care in noninjured, non-cardiac arrest patients. Using a population-based cohort of EMS records linked to hospital discharge data, we hypothesized that objective,out-of-hospitalfactorscoulddiscriminate between patients who were and For editorial comment see p 797.