Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24345305›Full record

SynthesisBMC pediatrics2013

Clinical prediction models for bronchopulmonary dysplasia: a systematic review and external validation study.

Wes Onland, Thomas P Debray, Matthew M Laughon, Martijn Miedema, Filip Cools, Lisa M Askie, Jeanette M Asselin, Sandra A Calvert, Sherry E Courtney, Carlo Dani and 14 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewValidation Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pediatrics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Development of a peripheral blood transcriptomic gene signature to predict bronchopulmonary dysplasia.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2023
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors.

Wes OnlandDepartment of Neonatology, Emma Children's Hospital, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. w.onland@amc.uva.nl.
Thomas P Debray
Matthew M Laughon
Martijn Miedema
Filip Cools
Lisa M Askie
Jeanette M Asselin
Sandra A Calvert
Sherry E Courtney
Carlo Dani
David J Durand
Neil Marlow
Janet L Peacock
J Jane Pillow
Roger F Soll
Ulrich H Thome
Patrick Truffert
Michael D Schreiber
Patrick Van Reempts
Valentina Vendettuoli
Giovanni Vento
Anton H van Kaam
Karel G Moons
Martin Offringa

Funding

Antimicrobial pharmacokinetics and outcomes in vulnerable infantsK23HD068497 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LAUGHON, MATTHEW · 2011 to 2015
$586k
NICHD NIH HHS K23 HD068497
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is a common complication of preterm birth. Very different models using clinical parameters at an early postnatal age to predict BPD have been developed with little extensive quantitative validation. The objective of this study is to review and validate clinical prediction models for BPD.

methodsWe searched the main electronic databases and abstracts from annual meetings. The STROBE instrument was used to assess the methodological quality. External validation of the retrieved models was performed using an individual patient dataset of 3229 patients at risk for BPD. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess discrimination for each model by calculating the area under the curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed for the best discriminating models by visually comparing predicted and observed BPD probabilities.

resultsWe identified 26 clinical prediction models for BPD. Although the STROBE instrument judged the quality from moderate to excellent, only four models utilised external validation and none presented calibration of the predictive value. For 19 prediction models with variables matched to our dataset, the AUCs ranged from 0.50 to 0.76 for the outcome BPD. Only two of the five best discriminating models showed good calibration.

conclusionsExternal validation demonstrates that, except for two promising models, most existing clinical prediction models are poor to moderate predictors for BPD. To improve the predictive accuracy and identify preterm infants for future intervention studies aiming to reduce the risk of BPD, additional variables are required. Subsequently, that model should be externally validated using a proper impact analysis before its clinical implementation.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalArea Under CurveBiasBirth WeightBronchopulmonary DysplasiaCalibrationDiuresisEarly DiagnosisFemaleGestational AgeHumansHypoxiaInfantInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornInfant, Premature

Identifiers

PMID24345305
PMCPMC3878731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.