ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine
External validation of a United Kingdom primary-care Cushing's prediction tool in a population of referred Dutch dogs.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning Model for an App-Based Tool to Assist With the Diagnosis of Canine Atopic Dermatitis.Veterinary dermatology · 2026Article
- The influence, promise, and potential perils of artificial intelligence in veterinary medicine: a call for improved awareness and literacy.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2026Article
- Agreeing Language in Veterinary Endocrinology (ALIVE): Hypothyroidism, Hyperthyroidism, (Euglycaemic) Diabetic Ketosis/Ketoacidosis, and Diabetic Remission-A Modified Delphi-Method-Based System to Create Consensus Definitions.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- External validation of a United Kingdom primary-care Cushing's prediction tool in a population of referred Dutch dogs.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
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
backgroundA prediction tool was developed and internally validated to aid the diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome in dogs attending UK primary-care practices. External validation is an important part of model validation to assess model performance when used in different populations.
objectivesTo assess the original prediction model's transportability, applicability, and diagnostic performance in a secondary-care practice in the Netherlands. ANIMALS: Two hundred thirty client-owned dogs.
methodsRetrospective observational study. Medical records of dogs under investigation of Cushing's syndrome between 2011 and 2020 were reviewed. Dogs diagnosed with Cushing's syndrome by the attending internists and fulfilling ALIVE criteria were defined as cases, others as non-cases. All dogs were scored using the aforementioned prediction tool. Dog characteristics and predictor-outcome effects in development and validation data sets were compared to assess model transportability. Calibration and discrimination were examined to assess model performance.
resultsEighty of 230 dogs were defined as cases. Significant differences in dog characteristics were found between UK primary-care and Dutch secondary-care populations. Not all predictors from the original model were confirmed to be significant predictors in the validation sample. The model systematically overestimated the probability of having Cushing's syndrome (a = -1.10, P < .001). Calibration slope was 1.35 and discrimination proved excellent (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The prediction model had moderate transportability, excellent discriminatory ability, and overall overestimated probability of having Cushing's syndrome. This study confirms its utility, though emphasizes that ongoing validation efforts of disease prediction tools are a worthwhile effort.
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.