Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39696542›Full record

ArticleDiagnostic and prognostic research2024

Validation of prognostic models predicting mortality or ICU admission in patients with COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries: a global individual participant data meta-analysis.

Johanna A A Damen, Banafsheh Arshi, Maarten van Smeden, Silvia Bertagnolio, Janet V Diaz, Ronaldo Silva, Soe Soe Thwin, Laure Wynants, Karel G M Moons

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Johanna A A Damen *Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, 3508 GA, the Netherlands. J.A.A.Damen@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7401-4593
Banafsheh Arshi *Department of Epidemiology, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0223-7872
Maarten van SmedenJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, 3508 GA, the Netherlands.
Silvia BertagnolioWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Janet V DiazWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Ronaldo SilvaWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Soe Soe ThwinWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Laure Wynants *Department of Epidemiology, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3037-122X
Karel G M Moons *Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, 3508 GA, the Netherlands.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe evaluated the performance of prognostic models for predicting mortality or ICU admission in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Clinical Platform, a repository of individual-level clinical data of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsWe identified eligible multivariable prognostic models for predicting overall mortality and ICU admission during hospital stay in patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 from a living review of COVID-19 prediction models. These models were evaluated using data contributed to the WHO Global Clinical Platform for COVID-19 from nine LMICs (Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea, India, Niger, Nigeria, Zambia, and Zimbabwe). Model performance was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration.

resultsOut of 144 eligible models, 140 were excluded due to a high risk of bias, predictors unavailable in LIMCs, or insufficient model description. Among 11,338 participants, the remaining models showed good discrimination for predicting in-hospital mortality (3 models), with areas under the curve (AUCs) ranging between 0.76 (95% CI 0.71-0.81) and 0.84 (95% CI 0.77-0.89). An AUC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.70-0.78) was found for predicting ICU admission risk (one model). All models showed signs of miscalibration and overfitting, with extensive heterogeneity between countries.

conclusionsAmong the available COVID-19 prognostic models, only a few could be validated on data collected from LMICs, mainly due to limited predictor availability. Despite their discriminative ability, selected models for mortality prediction or ICU admission showed varying and suboptimal calibration.

Identifiers

PMID39696542
PMCPMC11656577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.