Deep learning (DL) can aid doctors in detecting worsening patient states early, affording them time to react and prevent bad outcomes. While DL-based early warning models usually work well in the hospitals they were trained for, they tend to be less reliable when applied at new hospitals. This makes it difficult to deploy them at scale. Using carefully harmonised intensive care data from four data sources across Europe and the US (totalling 334,812 stays), we systematically assessed the reliability of DL models for three common adverse events: death, acute kidney injury (AKI), and sepsis. We tested whether using more than one data source and/or explicitly optimising for generalisability during training improves model performance at new hospitals. We found that models achieved high AUROC for mortality (0.838-0.869), AKI (0.823-0.866), and sepsis (0.749-0.824) at the training hospital. As expected, performance dropped at new hospitals, sometimes by as much as -0.200. Using more than one data source for training mitigated the performance drop, with multi-source models performing roughly on par with the best single-source model. This suggests that as data from more hospitals become available for training, model robustness is likely to increase, lower-bounding robustness with the performance of the most applicable data source in the training data. Dedicated methods promoting generalisability did not noticeably improve performance in our experiments.