ArticleCureus2023
Validation of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II Score in COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit in Times of Resource Scarcity.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regarding 'Combination of reverse shock index and simplified motor score as a strong discriminator of trauma outcomes'.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Prognostic Factors of Severe COVID-19.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Reevaluation of prognostic and severity indicators for COVID-19 patients in the emergency department.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Predictive modeling of COVID-19 mortality risk in chronic kidney disease patients using multiple machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Utility of Clinical Scores APACHE, CURB, SOFA, and NEWS2 at Admission and 5-Days after Symptom Onset in Predicting Severe COVID-19 in Patients with Diabetes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a high number of patients needed to be admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs). Such a high demand led to periods where resources were insufficient and the triage of patients was needed. This study aims to evaluate the performance of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II as a predictor of mortality in periods where triage protocols were implemented. Methods A single-center, longitudinal, retrospective cohort study was performed on patients admitted to the ICU between January 2020 and December 2021. Patients were divided into two periods: Period 1 (where patients needing ICU admission outnumbered the available resources) and Period 2 (where resources were adequate). The discriminative power of the APACHE II was checked using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Calibration was accessed, and survival analysis was performed. Results Data from 428 patients were analyzed (229 in Period 1 and 199 in Period 2). The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was 0.763 for Period 1 and 0.761 for Period 2, reflecting a good discriminative power. Logistic regression showed the APACHE II to be a significant predictor of mortality. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test demonstrated good calibration. The Youden index was determined, and a log-rank test showed a significantly lower survival for patients with higher APACHE II scores in both periods. Conclusions The APACHE II score is an effective tool in predicting mortality in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU in a period where resource allocation and triage of patients are needed, paving a way for the future development of better and improved triage systems.
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.