ArticlePloS one2022
Performance of NUTRIC score to predict 28-day mortality in critically ill patients after replacing APACHE II with SAPS 3.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill (NUTRIC) score has been advocated as a screening tool for nutrition risk assessment in critically ill patients. It was developed and validated to predict 28-day mortality using Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score as one of its components. However, nowadays the Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 (SAPS 3) demonstrates better performance. We aimed to test the performance of NUTRIC score in predicting 28-day mortality after replacement of APACHE II by SAPS 3, and the interaction between nutrition adequacy and mortality.
methodsAdult patients who received nutrition therapy and remained >3 days in intensive care unit were retrospectively evaluated. In order to replace APACHE II component, we used ranges of SAPS 3 with similar predicted mortality. Discrimination between these tools in predicting 28-day mortality was assessed using the ROC curve, calibration was evaluated with calibration belt, and correlation with intraclass correlation. The relationship between nutritional adequacy and mortality was assessed in a subgroup with available data.
results542 patients were analyzed (median age of 78 years old, 73.4% admitted for non-surgical reasons and 28-day mortality was 18.1%). Mortality prediction discrimination did not differ between tools (p>0.05), but showed a good agreement (intraclass correlation 0.86) with good calibration. In the subgroup analysis for nutritional adequacy (n = 99), no association with mortality was observed.
conclusionPerformance of NUTRIC score with SAPS 3 is similar to the original tool. Therefore, it might be used in settings where APACHE II is not available.
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.