Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33382834›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Validation of a simplified risk prediction model using a cloud based critical care registry in a lower-middle income country.

Bharath Kumar Tirupakuzhi Vijayaraghavan, Dilanthi Priyadarshini, Aasiyah Rashan, Abi Beane, Ramesh Venkataraman, Nagarajan Ramakrishnan, Rashan Haniffa, Indian Registry of IntenSive care(IRIS) collaborators

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. What intensive care registries can teach us about outcomes.Current opinion in critical care · 2021
    Review
  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

8 authors.

Bharath Kumar Tirupakuzhi VijayaraghavanDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Apollo Hospitals, India and Chennai Critical Care Consultants, Chennai, India.ORCID 0000-0002-1801-0667
Dilanthi PriyadarshiniNetwork for Improving Critical Care Systems and Training, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Aasiyah RashanNetwork for Improving Critical Care Systems and Training, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Abi BeaneMahidol Oxford Tropical Research Unit, Thailand, Bangkok.ORCID 0000-0001-7046-1580
Ramesh VenkataramanDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Apollo Hospitals, India and Chennai Critical Care Consultants, Chennai, India.
Nagarajan RamakrishnanDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Apollo Hospitals, India and Chennai Critical Care Consultants, Chennai, India.
Rashan HaniffaMahidol Oxford Tropical Research Unit, Thailand, Bangkok.
Indian Registry of IntenSive care(IRIS) collaborators

Funding

Wellcome Trust 215522Wellcome Trust WT215522/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of severity of illness scoring systems such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation in lower-middle income settings comes with important limitations, primarily due to data burden, missingness of key variables and lack of resources. To overcome these challenges, in Asia, a simplified model, designated as e-TropICS was previously developed. We sought to externally validate this model using data from a multi-centre critical care registry in India.

methodsSeven ICUs from the Indian Registry of IntenSive care(IRIS) contributed data to this study. Patients > 18 years of age with an ICU length of stay > 6 hours were included. Data including age, gender, co-morbidity, diagnostic category, type of admission, vital signs, laboratory measurements and outcomes were collected for all admissions. e-TropICS was calculated as per original methods. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was used to express the model's power to discriminate between survivors and non-survivors. For all tests of significance, a 2-sided P less than or equal to 0.05 was considered to be significant. AUROC values were considered poor when ≤ to 0.70, adequate between 0.71 to 0.80, good between 0.81 to 0.90, and excellent at 0.91 or higher. Calibration was assessed using Hosmer-Lemeshow C -statistic.

resultsWe included data from 2062 consecutive patient episodes. The median age of the cohort was 60 and predominantly male (n = 1350, 65.47%). Mechanical Ventilation and vasopressors were administered at admission in 504 (24.44%) and 423 (20.51%) patients respectively. Overall, mortality at ICU discharge was 10.28% (n = 212). Discrimination (AUC) for the e-TropICS model was 0.83 (95% CI 0.812-0.839) with an HL C statistic p value of < 0.05. The best sensitivity and specificity (84% and 72% respectively) were achieved with the model at an optimal cut-off for probability of 0.29.

conclusione-TropICS has utility in the care of critically unwell patients in the South Asia region with good discriminative capacity. Further refinement of calibration in larger datasets from India and across the South-East Asia region will help in improving model performance.

Indexed as

Critical CareIntensive Care UnitsModels, TheoreticalAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCloud ComputingCritical IllnessFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRespiration, Artificial

Identifiers

PMID33382834
PMCPMC7775074

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.