Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29574442›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Development of the Combined Assessment of Risk Encountered in Surgery (CARES) surgical risk calculator for prediction of postsurgical mortality and need for intensive care unit admission risk: a single-center retrospective study.

Diana Xin Hui Chan, Yilin Eileen Sim, Yiong Huak Chan, Ruban Poopalalingam, Hairil Rizal Abdullah

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04041076 (Validation of Postoperative Mortality Prediction for Elective Major Surgical Operation With Existing Risk Calculators Based on Preoperative Parameters), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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.

NCT04041076 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Validation of Postoperative Mortality Prediction for Elective Major Surgical Operation With Existing Risk Calculators Based on Preoperative Parameters

TypeobservationalSponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2019 to 2020Enrolled5,000ConditionsSurgery, DeathArmsMajor surgical operation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  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.

Diana Xin Hui ChanDivision of Anaesthesiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Yilin Eileen SimDivision of Anaesthesiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Yiong Huak ChanBiostatistics Unit, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Ruban PoopalalingamDivision of Anaesthesiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Hairil Rizal AbdullahDivision of Anaesthesiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-1916-0832

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAccurate surgical risk prediction is paramount in clinical shared decision making. Existing risk calculators have limited value in local practice due to lack of validation, complexities and inclusion of non-routine variables.

objectiveWe aim to develop a simple, locally derived and validated surgical risk calculator predicting 30-day postsurgical mortality and need for intensive care unit (ICU) stay (>24 hours) based on routinely collected preoperative variables. We postulate that accuracy of a clinical history-based scoring tool could be improved by including readily available investigations, such as haemoglobin level and red cell distribution width. METHODOLOGY: Electronic medical records of 90 785 patients, who underwent non-cardiac and non-neuro surgery between 1 January 2012 and 31 October 2016 in Singapore General Hospital, were retrospectively analysed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, laboratory results, surgical priority and surgical risk were collected. Outcome measures were death within 30 days after surgery and ICU admission. After excluding patients with missing data, the final data set consisted of 79 914 cases, which was divided randomly into derivation (70%) and validation cohort (30%). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to construct a single model predicting both outcomes using Odds Ratio (OR) of the risk variables. The ORs were then assigned ranks, which were subsequently used to construct the calculator.

resultsObserved mortality was 0.6%. The Combined Assessment of Risk Encountered in Surgery (CARES) surgical risk calculator, consisting of nine variables, was constructed. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) in the derivation and validation cohorts for mortality were 0.934 (0.917-0.950) and 0.934 (0.912-0.956), respectively, while the AUROC for ICU admission was 0.863 (0.848-0.878) and 0.837 (0.808-0.868), respectively. CARES also performed better than the American Society of Anaesthesiologists-Physical Status classification in terms of AUROC comparison.

conclusionThe development of the CARES surgical risk calculator allows for a simplified yet accurate prediction of both postoperative mortality and need for ICU admission after surgery.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overClinical Decision-MakingFemaleHospitals, GeneralHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareRetrospective Studiesicu staypostoperative mortalityrisk calculatorrisk predictionsurgical risk

Identifiers

PMID29574442
PMCPMC5875658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.