ArticleIranian journal of public health2021
Performance of Charlson and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index to Predict in-Hospital Mortality in Patients with Stroke in Sumadija and Western Serbia.
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of the Elixhauser comorbidity index on length of stay in patients with coronary artery disease.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Charleson and Elixhauser Comorbidity Indices in Predicting Mortality Among Young and Old Cervical Cancer Patients.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Designated and non-designated trauma centers and trauma patients: a retrospective analysis of non-fatal trauma discharges in Georgia, 2021.Injury epidemiology · 2026Article
- Charlson index predicts thirtyday mortality in critically ill stroke patients MIMICIV retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparing major comorbidity indices as predictors of all-cause mortality in the Veterans Affairs health care system.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2025Article
- The value of Age-adjusted Charlson and Elixhauser-Van Walraven comorbidity index in predicting prognosis for patients undergoing heart valve surgery.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComorbidities are major predictors of in-hospital mortality in stroke patients. The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the Elikhauser comorbidity index (ECI) are scoring systems for classifying comorbidities. We aimed to compare the performance of the CCI and ECI to predict in-hospital mortality in stroke patients.
methodsWe included patients hospitalized for stroke in the Clinical Center of Kragujevac, Serbia for the last 7 years. Hospitalizations caused by stroke, were identified by the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) codes I60.0 - I69.9. All patients were divided into two cohorts: Alive cohort (n=3297) and Mortality cohort (n=978).
resultsThere were significant associations between higher CCIS and increased risk of in-hospital mortality (HR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.01-1.12) and between higher ECIS and increased risk of in-hospital mortality (HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.99-1.09). Almost 2/3 patients (66.9%) had comorbidities included in the CCI score and 1/3 patients (30.2%) had comorbidities included in the ECI score. The statistically significant higher CCI score (t = -3.88, df = 1017.96,
conclusionBoth, the CCI and the ECI can be used as scoring systems for classifying comorbidities in the administrative databases, but the model's ECI Score had a better discriminative performance of in-hospital mortality in the stroke patients than the CCI Score model.
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.