ArticlePloS one2014
External validation and evaluation of reliability and validity of the S-ReSC scoring system to predict stone-free status after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Morphometry scores: Clinical implications in the management of staghorn calculi.Asian journal of urology · 2020Review
- Inter-observer variability amongst surgeons and radiologists in assessment of Guy's Stone Score and S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry score: A prospective evaluation.Arab journal of urology · 2019Article
- Predictability and Practicality of Image-Based Scoring Systems for Patient Assessment and Outcome Stratification During Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: a Contemporary Update.Current urology reports · 2017Review
- External validation and comparison of the scoring systems (S.T.O.N.E, GUY, CROES, S-ReSC) for predicting percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes for staghorn stones: A single center experience with 160 cases.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2017Article
- Current clinical scoring systems of percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes.Nature reviews. Urology · 2017Review
- How practical is the application of percutaneous nephrolithotomy scoring systems? Prospective study comparing Guy's Stone Score, S.T.O.N.E. score and the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) nomogram.Arab journal of urology · 2017Article
- Nephrolithometric Scoring Systems to Predict Outcomes of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.Reviews in urology · 2016Article
- Prospective evaluation of outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using the 'STONE' nephrolithometry score: A single-centre experience.Arab journal of urology · 2015Article
- Contemporary assessment of renal stone complexity using cross-sectional imaging.Current urology reports · 2015Review
- Medium-term follow-up of clinically insignificant residual fragments after minimal invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prognostic features and risk factors.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Article
- Modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity score for retrograde intrarenal surgery.Urolithiasis · 2014Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity (S-ReSC) scoring system was developed to predict the stone-free rate (SFR) after single-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). This study is an external validation of this scoring system. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective review included 327 patients who underwent PCNL at 2 tertiary referral centers. The S-ReSC score was assigned from 1 to 9 based on the number of sites involved. The stone free status was defined as either complete clearance or clinically insignificant residual fragments <4 mm in size at 1 month follow-up imaging. Inter-observer and test-retest reliabilities were evaluated. The statistical performance of the prediction model was assessed by its predictive accuracy, predictive probability, and clinical usefulness.
resultsThe overall SFR was 65.4%. SFRs were 83.9%, 47.6%, and 21.4% in low (1-2), intermediate (3-4), and high (5-9) score groups, respectively, with significant differences (P<0.001). Inter-observer and test-retest reliabilities revealed almost perfect agreements. External validation of the S-ReSC scoring system revealed an AUC of 0.731 (95% CI 0.675-0.788). The AUC of 3-titered S-ReSC score groups was 0.691 (95% CI, 0.629-0.753). The calibration plot showed that the predicted probability of SFR had a concordance comparable to that of the observed frequency. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic revealed an adequate performance of the predictive model (P = 0.10). Inter-observer and test-retest reliability showed a good level of agreement.
conclusionsThe S-ReSC scoring system is useful in predicting the post-PCNL SFR and in describing the complexity of renal stones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.