ArticleHeliyon2024
Validity of the ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator as a tool to predict postoperative outcomes in subacute orthopedic trauma diagnoses.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This retrospective study aimed to validate the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator (SCR) to predict 30-day postoperative outcomes in patients with one of the following subacute orthopedic trauma diagnoses; multiple rib fractures, pelvic ring/acetabular fracture, or unilateral femoral fracture. Methods: Data of patients with these diagnoses treated between January 1, 2015 and September 19, 2020 were extracted from the patients' medical files. Diagnostic performance, discrimination, calibration, and accuracy of the ACS NSQIP SRC to predict specific outcomes developing within 30 days after surgery was determined. Results: The total cohort of the three diagnoses consisted of 435 patients. ACS NSQIP SRC underestimated the risk for serious complications, especially in patients with multiple rib fractures (8.3% predicted vs 17.2% observed) or pelvic ring/acetabular fracture (6.1% vs 19.8%). Underestimation was more pronounced for the composite outcome 'any complication'. Sensitivity ranged from 16.7% to 100% and specificity from 41.1% to 97.1%. Specificity exceeded sensitivity for pelvic ring/acetabular and femoral fractures. Discrimination was good for predicting death (femoral fracture), fair for readmission (femoral fracture), serious complication (multiple rib fractures), and any complication (multiple rib fractures), but poor in all other outcomes and diagnoses. Calibration and accuracy were adequate for all three diagnoses (p-value for Hosmer-Lemeshow test >0.05 and Brier scores <0.25). Conclusion: Performance of the ACS NSQIP SRC in the studied cohort was variable for all three diagnoses. Although it underestimated the risk of most outcomes, calibration and accuracy seemed generally adequate. For most outcomes, adequate diagnostic performance and discrimination could not be confirmed.
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.