Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25234196›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2015

A meta-analysis of the predictive accuracy of postoperative mortality using the American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status classification system.

Chieh Yang Koo, Joseph A Hyder, Jonathan P Wanderer, Matthias Eikermann, Satya Krishna Ramachandran

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Chieh Yang KooUniversity Medicine Cluster, National University Health System, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119074, Singapore.
Joseph A Hyder
Jonathan P Wanderer
Matthias Eikermann
Satya Krishna Ramachandran

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status (ASA) tool has been applied to determine compensation, risk adjustment and risk prediction, but little is known about the accuracy and generalizability of this tool for prediction of postoperative mortality.

methodsWe systematically investigated prior published reports of associations between ASA physical status and mortality to test the hypothesis that ASA physical status will have varying accuracy in prediction of postoperative mortality across surgical populations with varying surgical risk of mortality. We used random effects models and metaregression to account for heterogeneity.

resultsCombining 77 studies with 165,705 patients, the ASA physical status tool demonstrated the following pooled performance (95 % confidence intervals)--sensitivity 0.74 (0.73, 0.74), specificity 0.67 (0.67, 0.67), and area under summary receiver operating curve 0.736 (0.725, 0.747). Metaregression revealed that study death rates and surgical specialty were significant factors.

conclusionASA physical status is a better predictor of postoperative mortality in settings with lower rather than higher death rates.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityAnesthesiologyEffect Modifier, EpidemiologicElective Surgical ProceduresHumansMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRisk AssessmentSurgical Procedures, OperativeUnited States

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.