ArticleBiomedicine hub
Value of Flemish Version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool in Predicting Unfavorable Outcomes after Elective Cancer Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Biomedicine hub. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool (fTRST), derived from the Triage Risk Screening Tool for assessing risk of readmission to the emergency department, is increasingly used as a simple screening tool in oncology. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the fTRST in the context of elective surgical treatment for urologic cancer patients. Methods: We included 886 patients who underwent major urologic cancer surgery at our institution between 2020 and 2022 and underwent preoperative screening, including fTRST. We set the fTRST cutoff at 2 and used propensity score matching and multivariate regression analysis to assess how fTRST affected two postoperative outcomes: ambulation failure and delirium. Results: Of the 886 patients, 693 (78%) had an fTRST score <2, and 193 (22%) had an fTRST score ≥2 (high likelihood of frailty). After matching the groups by propensity scores, we compared the outcomes of 131 patients in each group. We found that the group with fTRST ≥2 had significantly higher rates of ambulation failure (15 vs. 11%, Conclusion: The fTRST might be a screening tool with great potential for identifying patients at high risk for unfavorable postoperative outcomes in elective urologic cancer surgery.
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.