Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25859861›Full record

Observational studyRevista brasileira de cirurgia cardiovascular : orgao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular

Performance of InsCor and three international scores in cardiac surgery at Santa Casa de Marília.

Marcos Gradim Tiveron, Helton Augusto Bomfim, Maycon Soto Simplício, Marcos Henriques Bergonso, Milena Paiva Brasil de Matos, Sergio Marques Ferreira, Eraldo Antônio Pelloso, Rubens Tofano de Barros

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Revista brasileira de cirurgia cardiovascular : orgao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Marcos Gradim TiveronIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Helton Augusto BomfimIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Maycon Soto SimplícioIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Marcos Henriques BergonsoIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Milena Paiva Brasil de MatosIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Sergio Marques FerreiraIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Eraldo Antônio PellosoIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.
Rubens Tofano de BarrosIrmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Marília, Marília, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo apply and to compare the Society of Thoracic Surgery score (STS), EuroSCORE (Eurosc1), EuroSCORE II (Eurosc2) and InsCor (IS) for predicting mortality in patients undergoing to coronary artery bypass graft and/or valve surgery at the Santa Casa Marilia.

methodsThe present study is a cohort. It is a prospective, observational, analytical and unicentric. We analyzed 562 consecutive patients coronary artery bypass graft and/or valve surgery, between April 2011 and June 2013 at the Santa Casa Marilia. Mortality was calculated for each patient through the scores STS, Eurosc1, Eurosc2 and IS. The calibration was calculated using the Hosmer Lemeshow test and discrimination by ROC curve.

resultsThe hospital mortality was 4,6%. The calibration is generally adequate group P=0.345, P=0.765, P=0.272 and P=0.062 for STS, Eurosc1, Eurosc2, and IS respectively. The discriminatory power of STS score 0.649 (95% CI 0.529 to 0.770, P=0.012), Eurosc1 0.706 (95% CI 0.589 to 0.823, P ≤0.001), Eurosc2 was 0.704 (95% CI 0.590-0.818 P=0.001) and InsCor 0.739 (95% CI 0.638 to 0.839, P ≤0.001).

conclusionWe can say that overall, the InsCor was the best model, mainly in the discrimination of the sample. The InsCor showed good accuracy, in addition to being effective and easy to apply, especially by using a smaller number of variables compared to the other models.

Indexed as

BrazilCalibrationCoronary Artery BypassCoronary DiseaseEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleHeart Valve DiseasesHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHumansMaleReference ValuesReproducibility of ResultsRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID25859861
PMCPMC4389514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.