Validity of prognostic models of critical COVID-19 is variable. A systematic review with external validation

dc.contributor.authorBosch de Basea, Magda
dc.contributor.authorCobo, Inés
dc.contributor.authorSubirana Cachinero, Isaac
dc.contributor.authorCeresa, Mario
dc.contributor.authorFamada, Ernest
dc.contributor.authorGimeno Santos, Elena, 1980-
dc.contributor.authorDelgado-Ortiz, Laura
dc.contributor.authorFaner, Rosa
dc.contributor.authorMolina Molina, María
dc.contributor.authorAgustí García-Navarro, Àlvar
dc.contributor.authorMuñoz, Xavier
dc.contributor.authorSibila Vidal, Oriol
dc.contributor.authorGea Guiral, Joaquim
dc.contributor.authorGarcía Aymerich, Judith
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-08T18:41:43Z
dc.date.available2024-03-08T18:41:43Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.date.updated2024-03-08T18:41:43Z
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To identify prognostic models which estimate the risk of critical COVID-19 in hospitalized patients and to assess their validation properties. Study design and setting: We conducted a systematic review in Medline (up to January 2021) of studies developing or updating a model that estimated the risk of critical COVID-19, defined as death, admission to intensive care unit, and/or use of mechanical ventilation during admission. Models were validated in two datasets with different backgrounds (HM [private Spanish hospital network], n = 1,753, and ICS [public Catalan health system], n = 1,104), by assessing discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]) and calibration (plots). Results: We validated 18 prognostic models. Discrimination was good in nine of them (AUCs ≥ 80%) and higher in those predicting mortality (AUCs 65%-87%) than those predicting intensive care unit admission or a composite outcome (AUCs 53%-78%). Calibration was poor in all models providing outcome's probabilities and good in four models providing a point-based score. These four models used mortality as outcome and included age, oxygen saturation, and C-reactive protein among their predictors. Conclusion: The validity of models predicting critical COVID-19 by using only routinely collected predictors is variable. Four models showed good discrimination and calibration when externally validated and are recommended for their use.
dc.format.extent15 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.idgrec744783
dc.identifier.issn0895-4356
dc.identifier.pmid37142168
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/208559
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.011
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2023, vol. 159, p. 274-288
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.011
dc.rightscc-by-nc-nd (c) Bosch de Basea, Magda, et al.; Elsevier B.V., 2023
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Biomedicina)
dc.subject.classificationCOVID-19
dc.subject.classificationAssistència hospitalària
dc.subject.classificationUnitats de cures intensives
dc.subject.otherCOVID-19
dc.subject.otherHospital care
dc.subject.otherIntensive care units
dc.titleValidity of prognostic models of critical COVID-19 is variable. A systematic review with external validation
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Fitxers

Paquet original

Mostrant 1 - 1 de 1
Carregant...
Miniatura
Nom:
848561.pdf
Mida:
960.08 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format