Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29041985›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2017

Simplified prognostic model for critically ill patients in resource limited settings in South Asia.

Rashan Haniffa, Mavuto Mukaka, Sithum Bandara Munasinghe, Ambepitiyawaduge Pubudu De Silva, Kosala Saroj Amarasiri Jayasinghe, Abi Beane, Nicolette de Keizer, Arjen M Dondorp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Evaluation of the SMS-ICU score for multicontinental use: A federated external validation study using critical care registry data.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Is it Time to Develop an Indian Sepsis-related Mortality Prediction Score?Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Rashan HaniffaNational Intensive Care Surveillance, Quality Secretariat Building, Castle Street Hospital for Women, Colombo 08, Sri Lanka. rashan@nicslk.com.
Mavuto MukakaMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, 3/F, 60th Anniversary Chalermprakiat Building, 420/6 Rajvithi Road, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Sithum Bandara MunasingheNational Intensive Care Surveillance, Quality Secretariat Building, Castle Street Hospital for Women, Colombo 08, Sri Lanka.
Ambepitiyawaduge Pubudu De SilvaNational Intensive Care Surveillance, Quality Secretariat Building, Castle Street Hospital for Women, Colombo 08, Sri Lanka.
Kosala Saroj Amarasiri JayasingheDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo, No. 25, Kynsey Road, Colombo 08, Sri Lanka.
Abi BeaneMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, 3/F, 60th Anniversary Chalermprakiat Building, 420/6 Rajvithi Road, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Nicolette de KeizerAcademic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam-Zuidoost, Netherlands.
Arjen M DondorpMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, 3/F, 60th Anniversary Chalermprakiat Building, 420/6 Rajvithi Road, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent critical care prognostic models are predominantly developed in high-income countries (HICs) and may not be feasible in intensive care units (ICUs) in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Existing prognostic models cannot be applied without validation in LMICs as the different disease profiles, resource availability, and heterogeneity of the population may limit the transferability of such scores. A major shortcoming in using such models in LMICs is the unavailability of required measurements. This study proposes a simplified critical care prognostic model for use at the time of ICU admission.

methodsThis was a prospective study of 3855 patients admitted to 21 ICUs from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka who were aged 16 years and over and followed to ICU discharge. Variables captured included patient age, admission characteristics, clinical assessments, laboratory investigations, and treatment measures. Multivariate logistic regression was used to develop three models for ICU mortality prediction: model 1 with clinical, laboratory, and treatment variables; model 2 with clinical and laboratory variables; and model 3, a purely clinical model. Internal validation based on bootstrapping (1000 samples) was used to calculate discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow C-Statistic; higher values indicate poorer calibration). Comparison was made with the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II models.

resultsModel 1 recorded the respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), blood urea, haemoglobin, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor use on ICU admission. Model 2, named TropICS (Tropical Intensive Care Score), included emergency surgery, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, GCS, blood urea, and haemoglobin. Model 3 included respiratory rate, emergency surgery, and GCS. AUC was 0.818 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.800-0.835) for model 1, 0.767 (0.741-0.792) for TropICS, and 0.725 (0.688-0.762) for model 3. The Hosmer-Lemeshow C-Statistic p values were less than 0.05 for models 1 and 3 and 0.18 for TropICS. In comparison, when APACHE II and SAPS II were applied to the same dataset, AUC was 0.707 (0.688-0.726) and 0.714 (0.695-0.732) and the C-Statistic was 124.84 (p < 0.001) and 1692.14 (p < 0.001), respectively.

conclusionThis paper proposes TropICS as the first multinational critical care prognostic model developed in a non-HIC setting.

Indexed as

PrognosisAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAPACHEArea Under CurveBangladeshCohort StudiesCritical IllnessDeveloping CountriesFemaleHealth ResourcesHospital MortalityHumansIndiaAPACHE IICritical careLower middle income countryModel performancePrognostic modelResource limited settings

Identifiers

PMID29041985
PMCPMC5645891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.