Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21761595›Full record

ArticleCritical care medicine2011

Short-term mortality prediction for acute lung injury patients: external validation of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network prediction model.

Abdulla Damluji, Elizabeth Colantuoni, Pedro A Mendez-Tellez, Jonathan E Sevransky, Eddy Fan, Carl Shanholtz, Margaret Wojnar, Peter J Pronovost, Dale M Needham

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Integrative assessment of chlorine-induced acute lung injury in mice.American journal of respiratory cell and molecular biology · 2012
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Abdulla DamlujiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA.
Elizabeth Colantuoni
Pedro A Mendez-Tellez
Jonathan E Sevransky
Eddy Fan
Carl Shanholtz
Margaret Wojnar
Peter J Pronovost
Dale M Needham
Johns Hopkins University · USPennsylvania State University · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

VENTILATOR ASSOCIATED LUNG INJURY: MOLECULAR APPROACHESP50HL073994 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI NATARAJAN, VISWANATHAN · 2003 to 2007
$21.3M
CIHRNHLBI NIH HHS P050 HL 73994NHLBI NIH HHS P50 HL073994
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAn independent cohort of patients with acute lung injury was used to evaluate the external validity of a simple prediction model for short-term mortality previously developed using data from Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network (ARDSNet) trials.

designData for external validation were obtained from a prospective cohort study of patients with acute lung injury.

settingThirteen intensive care units at four teaching hospitals in Baltimore, MD. PATIENTS: Five hundred and eight nontrauma patients with acute lung injury.

interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsOf the 508 patients eligible for this analysis, 234 (46%) died inhospital. Discrimination of the ARDSNet prediction model for inhospital mortality, evaluated by the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves, was 0.67 for our external validation data set vs. 0.70 and 0.68 using Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and the ARDSNet validation data set, respectively. In evaluating calibration of the model, predicted vs. observed inhospital mortality for the external validation data set was similar for both low-risk (ARDSNet model score = 0) and high-risk (score = 3 or 4+) patient strata. However, for intermediate-risk (score = 1 or 2) patients, observed inhospital mortality was substantially higher than predicted mortality (25.3% vs. 16.5% and 40.6% vs. 31.0% for score = 1 and 2, respectively). Sensitivity analyses limiting our external validation data set to only those patients meeting the ARDSNet trial eligibility criteria and to those who received mechanical ventilation in compliance with the ARDSNet ventilation protocol did not substantially change the model's discrimination or improve its calibration.

conclusionsEvaluation of the ARDSNet prediction model using an external acute lung injury cohort demonstrated similar discrimination of the model as was observed with the ARDSNet validation data set. However, there were substantial differences in observed vs. predicted mortality among intermediate-risk patients with acute lung injury. The ARDSNet model provided reasonable, but imprecise, estimates of predicted mortality when applied to our external validation cohort of patients with acute lung injury.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsAcute Lung InjuryAdultAgedAge FactorsAPACHEArea Under CurveCohort StudiesCritical CareCritical IllnessFemaleHospital MortalityHospitals, TeachingHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID21761595
PMCPMC3129473
OpenAlexW20586538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.