ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2024
Analysis of Influencing Factors and Construction of Predictive Model for Persistent Cough After Lung Cancer Resection Under Thoracoscopy.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to explore the influencing factors of cough after pulmonary resection (CAP) after thoracoscopic lung resection in lung cancer patients and to develop a predictive model. Methods: A total of 374 lung cancer patients who underwent lung resection in our hospital from March 2020 to October 2023 were randomly divided into a modeling group (n=262) and a validation group (n=112). Based on the occurrence of CAP in the modeling group, the patients were divided into a CAP group (n=85) and a non-CAP group (n=177). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors of CAP in lung cancer patients. A nomogram model for predicting the risk of CAP was constructed using R4.3.1. The consistency of the model's predictions was evaluated, and a clinical decision curve (DCA) was drawn to assess the clinical utility of the nomogram. The predictive performance of the model was evaluated using ROC curves and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Results: Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that smoking history (OR=6.285, 95% CI: 3.031-13.036), preoperative respiratory function training (OR=20.293, 95% CI: 7.518-54.779), surgical scope (OR=20.667, 95% CI: 7.734-55.228), and peribronchial lymph node dissection (OR=5.883, 95% CI: 2.829-12.235) were significant influencing factors of CAP in lung cancer patients (P<0.05). ROC curves indicated good discriminatory power of the model, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed a high degree of agreement between predicted and actual probabilities. The DCA curve revealed that the nomogram model had high clinical value when the high-risk threshold was between 0.08 and 0.98. Conclusion: The nomogram model based on smoking history, preoperative respiratory function training, surgical scope, and peribronchial lymph node dissection has high predictive performance for CAP in lung cancer patients. It is useful for clinical prediction, guiding preoperative preparation, and postoperative care.
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.