Trial reportBioMed research international2014
Pediatric Index of Mortality and PIM2 scores have good calibration in a large cohort of children from a developing country.
Trial report in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Infant Intensive Care Unit: Is it Time to Change?Indian journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Performance of Pediatric Index of Mortality PIM-3 in a Tertiary Care PICU in India.Journal of pediatric intensive care · 2024Article
- Validity of Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 score as an Outcome Predictor in Pediatric ICU of a Public Sector Tertiary Care Hospital in Pakistan.Journal of pediatric intensive care · 2022Article
- Multicenter validation of PIM3 and PIM2 in Brazilian pediatric intensive care units.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Validation of an Electronic Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 Score in a Mixed Quaternary PICU.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2020Observational
- A Simple Scoring System for Quick, Accurate, and Reliable Early Diagnosis of Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2018Article
- Observational
- A Review of Pediatric Critical Care in Resource-Limited Settings: A Look at Past, Present, and Future Directions.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2016Review
- Illness severity and organ dysfunction scoring in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2016Review
- Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II for critically ill children?Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOur objective was to validate the Pediatric Index of Mortality (PIM) and PIM2 scores in a large cohort of children from a developing country.
designProspective observational study.
settingPediatric intensive care unit of a tertiary care teaching hospital. PATIENTS: All children aged <18 years admitted between June 2011 and July 2013. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsWe evaluated the discriminative ability and calibration as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit (GOF), and standardized mortality ratio (SMR), respectively. Of the 819 children enrolled, 232 (28%) died. The median (IQR) age of the study subjects was 4 years (0.8, 10). The major reasons for ICU admission as well as mortality were sepsis/severe sepsis. The area under ROC curves for PIM and PIM2 was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.70-0.78), respectively. The goodness-of-fit test showed a good calibration across deciles of risk for the two scores with P values being >0.05. The SMR (95% CI) was 0.99 (0.85-1.15) and 1 (0.85-1.16) for PIM and PIM2, respectively. The calibration across different age and diagnostic subgroups was also good.
conclusionPIM and PIM2 scores had good calibration in our setup.
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.