Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33257987›Full record

SynthesisInteractive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2021

A systematic review of risk prediction models for perioperative mortality after thoracic surgery.

Marcus Taylor, Syed F Hashmi, Glen P Martin, Michael Shackcloth, Rajesh Shah, Richard Booton, Stuart W Grant

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Predicting the unpredictable in cardiothoracic surgery.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

Marcus TaylorDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University Hospital Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Syed F HashmiDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University Hospital Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Glen P MartinDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Heath Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Michael ShackclothDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Rajesh ShahDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University Hospital Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Richard BootonDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University Hospital Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Stuart W GrantDivision of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Manchester, ERC, Manchester University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGuidelines advocate that patients being considered for thoracic surgery should undergo a comprehensive preoperative risk assessment. Multiple risk prediction models to estimate the risk of mortality after thoracic surgery have been developed, but their quality and performance has not been reviewed in a systematic way. The objective was to systematically review these models and critically appraise their performance.

methodsThe Cochrane Library and the MEDLINE database were searched for articles published between 1990 and 2019. Studies that developed or validated a model predicting perioperative mortality after thoracic surgery were included. Data were extracted based on the checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies.

resultsA total of 31 studies describing 22 different risk prediction models were identified. There were 20 models developed specifically for thoracic surgery with two developed in other surgical specialties. A total of 57 different predictors were included across the identified models. Age, sex and pneumonectomy were the most frequently included predictors in 19, 13 and 11 models, respectively. Model performance based on either discrimination or calibration was inadequate for all externally validated models. The most recent data included in validation studies were from 2018. Risk of bias (assessed using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool) was high for all except two models.

conclusionsDespite multiple risk prediction models being developed to predict perioperative mortality after thoracic surgery, none could be described as appropriate for contemporary thoracic surgery. Contemporary validation of available models or new model development is required to ensure that appropriate estimates of operative risk are available for contemporary thoracic surgical practice.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalHospital MortalityHumansPerioperative PeriodPublication BiasRiskThoracic Surgical Procedures90-Day mortalityPerioperative mortalityRisk modelThoracic surgery

Identifiers

PMID33257987
PMCPMC8906726

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.