ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2024
Adaptability of prognostic prediction models for patients with acute coronary syndrome during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 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.
- Practical adaptability of a pre-hospital prognostic prediction model for patients following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe detrimental repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic on the quality of care and clinical outcomes for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) necessitate a rigorous re-evaluation of prognostic prediction models in the context of the pandemic environment. This study aimed to elucidate the adaptability of prediction models for 30-day mortality in patients with ACS during the pandemic periods.
methodsA total of 2041 consecutive patients with ACS were included from 32 institutions between December 2020 and April 2023. The dataset comprised patients who were admitted for ACS and underwent coronary angiography for the diagnosis during hospitalisation. The prediction accuracy of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) and a machine learning model, KOTOMI, was evaluated for 30-day mortality in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).
resultsThe area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.89) in the GRACE and 0.87 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.91) in the KOTOMI for STEMI. The difference of 0.020 (95% CI -0.098-0.13) was not significant. For NSTE-ACS, the respective AUROCs were 0.82 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.91) in the GRACE and 0.83 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.91) in the KOTOMI, also demonstrating insignificant difference of 0.010 (95% CI -0.023 to 0.25). The prediction accuracy of both models had consistency in patients with STEMI and insignificant variation in patients with NSTE-ACS between the pandemic periods.
conclusionsThe prediction models maintained high accuracy for 30-day mortality of patients with ACS even in the pandemic periods, despite marginal variation observed.
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.