Validity of prognostic models of critical COVID-19 is variable. A systematic review with external validation
Mostra el registre complet Registre parcial de l'ítem
- dc.contributor.author Cárdenas Fuentes, Gabriela, 1985-
- dc.contributor.author Bosch de Basea i Gómez, Magda, 1982-
- dc.contributor.author Cobo, Inés
- dc.contributor.author Subirana Cachinero, Isaac
- dc.contributor.author Ceresa, Mario
- dc.contributor.author Famada, Ernest
- dc.contributor.author Gimeno Santos, Elena, 1980-
- dc.contributor.author Delgado Ortiz, Laura
- dc.contributor.author Faner, Rosa
- dc.contributor.author Molina-Molina, María
- dc.contributor.author Agustí García-Navarro, Àlvar
- dc.contributor.author Muñoz, Xavier
- dc.contributor.author Sibila, Oriol
- dc.contributor.author Gea Guiral, Joaquim
- dc.contributor.author García Aymerich, Judith
- dc.date.accessioned 2023-07-13T06:55:36Z
- dc.date.available 2023-07-13T06:55:36Z
- dc.date.issued 2023
- dc.description.abstract Objectives: 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.mimetype application/pdf
- dc.identifier.citation Cárdenas-Fuentes G, Bosch de Basea M, Cobo I, Subirana I, Ceresa M, Famada E, Gimeno-Santos E, Delgado-Ortiz L, Faner R, Molina-Molina M, Agustí À, Muñoz X, Sibila O, Gea J, Garcia-Aymerich J. Validity of prognostic models of critical COVID-19 is variable. A systematic review with external validation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Jul;159:274-88. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.011
- dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.011
- dc.identifier.issn 0895-4356
- dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10230/57560
- dc.language.iso eng
- dc.publisher Elsevier
- dc.relation.ispartof J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Jul;159:274-88
- dc.rights © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
- dc.rights.accessRights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
- dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- dc.subject.keyword COVID-19
- dc.subject.keyword Critical disease
- dc.subject.keyword Epidemiology
- dc.subject.keyword External validation
- dc.subject.keyword Intensive care unit
- dc.subject.keyword Prognostic models
- dc.title Validity of prognostic models of critical COVID-19 is variable. A systematic review with external validation
- dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
- dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion