ArticleTropical medicine & international health : TM & IH2021
Assessing the performance of clinical diagnostic models for dehydration among patients with cholera and undernutrition in Bangladesh.
Article in Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- New insights in fluid monitoring for surgical patients. A concept study.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAccurately assessing dehydration severity is a critical step in reducing mortality from diarrhoea, but is complicated by cholera and undernutrition. This study seeks to assess the accuracy of two clinical diagnostic models for dehydration among patients over five years with cholera and undernutrition and compare their respective performance to the World Health Organization (WHO) algorithm.
methodsIn this secondary analysis of data collected from the NIRUDAK study, accuracy of the full and simplified NIRUDAK models for predicting severe and any dehydration was measured using the area under the Receiver Operator Characteristic curve (AUC) among patients over five with/without cholera and with/without wasting. Bootstrap with 1000 iterations was used to compare the m-index for each NIRUDAK model to that of the WHO algorithm.
resultsA total of 2,139 and 2,108 patients were included in the nutrition and cholera subgroups respectively with an overall median age of 35 years (IQR = 42) and 49.6% female. All subgroups had acceptable discrimination in diagnosing severe or any dehydration (AUC > 0.60); though the full NIRUDAK model performed best among patients without cholera, with an AUC of 0.82 (95%CI:0.79, 0.85) and among patients without wasting, with an AUC of 0.79 (95%CI:0.76, 0.81). Compared with the WHO's algorithm, both the full and simplified NIRUDAK models performed significantly better in terms of their m-index (p < 0.001) for all comparisons, except for the simplified NIRUDAK model in the wasting group.
conclusionsBoth the full and simplified NIRUDAK models performed less well in patients over five years with cholera and/or wasting; however, both performed better than the WHO algorithm.
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.