Objective: To compare the performance of the Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score (OASIS), the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score in predicting 28-day mortality in acute kidney injury (AKI) patients. Methods: Data were extracted from the Beijing Acute Kidney Injury Trial (BAKIT). A total of 2954 patients with complete clinical data were included in this study. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to analyze and evaluate the predictive effects of the four scoring systems on the 28-day mortality risk of AKI patients and each subgroup. The best cutoff value was identified by the highest combined sensitivity and specificity using Youden's index. Results: Among the four scoring systems, the area under the curve (AUC) of OASIS was the highest. The comparison of AUC values of different scoring systems showed that there were no significant differences among OASIS, APACHE II, and SAPS II, which were better than SOFA. Moreover, logistic analysis revealed that OASIS was an independent risk factor for 28-day mortality in AKI patients. OASIS also had good predictive ability for the 28-day mortality of each subgroup of AKI patients. Conclusion: OASIS, APACHE II, and SAPS II all presented good discrimination and calibration in predicting the 28-day mortality risk of AKI patients. OASIS, APACHE II, and SAPS II had better predictive accuracy than SOFA, but due to the complexity of APACHE II and SAPS II calculations, OASIS is a good substitute.