Observational studyMedicine2017
Comparison of the pediatric risk of mortality, pediatric index of mortality, and pediatric index of mortality 2 models in a pediatric intensive care unit in China: A validation study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mortality in children and adolescents with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2025Article
- A new nomogram for the individualized prediction of children's mortality risk in pediatric intensive care unit.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
- 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
- Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Ability of PRISM4 and PIM3 to Predict Mortality in Patients Admitted to Pediatric Intensive Care Unit; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Administrative data in pediatric critical care research-Potential, challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Article
- Impact of and risk factors for pediatric acute kidney injury defined by the pROCK criteria in a Chinese PICU population.Pediatric research · 2021Article
- Article
- Performance of Three Mortality Prediction Scores and Evaluation of Important Determinants in Eight Pediatric Intensive Care Units in China.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was designed with the aim of comparing the performances of the pediatric risk of mortality (PRISM), pediatric index of mortality (PIM), and revised version pediatric index of mortality 2 (PIM2) models in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in China.A total of 852 critically ill pediatric patients were recruited in the study between January 1 and December 31, 2014. The variables required to calculate PRISM, PIM, and PIM2 were collected. Mode l performance was evaluated by assessing the calibration and discrimination. Discrimination between death and survival was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC). Calibration across deciles of risk was evaluated using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit χ test.Of the 852 patients enrolled in this study, 745 patients survived until the end of the PICU stay (107 patients died, 12.56%). The AUCs (95% confidence intervals, CI) were 0.729 (0.670-0.788) for PRISM, 0.721 (0.667-0.776) for PIM, and 0.726 (0.671-0.781) for PIM2. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test revealed a chi-square of 7.26 (P = 0.51, v = 10) for PRISM, 26.28 (P = 0.0009, v = 10) for PIM, and 10.28 (P = 0.21, v = 10) for PIM2. The standardized mortality rate was 1.14 (95%CI: 0.93-1.36) for PRISM, 1.89 (95%CI: 1.55-2.27) for PIM, and 2.13 (95%CI: 1.75-2.55) for PIM2.The PRISM, PIM, and PIM2 scores demonstrated an acceptable discriminatory performance. With the exception of PIM, the PRISM and PIM2 models had good calibrations.
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.