ArticleHeliyon2024
An empirical approach for life expectancy estimation based on survival analysis among a post-acute myocardial infarction population.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
- Multivariate Analysis of the Determinants of Total Mortality in the European Union with Focus on Fat Intake, Diabetes, Myocardial Infarction, Life Expectancy, and Preventable Mortality: A Panel Data Fixed-Effects Panel Data Model Approach.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
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
Background: Practical communication of prognosis is pertinent in the clinical setting. Survival analysis techniques are standardly used in cohort studies; however, their results are not straightforward for interpretation as compared to the graspable notion of life expectancy (LE). The present study empirically examines the relationship between Cox regression coefficients (HRs), which reflect the relative risk of the investigated risk factors for mortality, and years of potential life lost (YPLL) values after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: This retrospective population-based study included patients aged 40-80 years, who survived AMI hospitalization from January 1, 2002, to October 25, 2017. A survival analysis approach assessed relationships between variables and the risk for all-cause mortality in an up to 21-year follow-up period. The total score was calculated for each patient as the summation of the Cox regression coefficients (AdjHRs) values. Individual LE and YPLL were calculated. YPLL was assessed as a function of the total score. Results: The cohort (n = 6316, age 63.0 ± 10.5 years, 73.4 % males) was randomly split into training (n = 4243) and validation (n = 2073) datasets. Sixteen main clinical risk factors for mortality were explored (total score of 0-14.2 points). After adjustment for age, sex and nationality, a one-point increase in the total score was associated with YPLL of ∼one year. A goodness-of-fit of the prediction model found 0.624 and 0.585 for the training and validation datasets respectively. Conclusions: This functional derivation for converting coefficients of survival analysis into the comprehensible form of YPLL/LE allows for practical prognostic calculation and communication.
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.