ReviewPediatric investigation2025
The challenges for developing prognostic prediction models for acute kidney injury in hospitalized children: A systematic review.
Review in Pediatric investigation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- External Validation, Recalibration, and Extension of a Prediction Model of Early Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Children Using Multicenter Data.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- The challenges for developing prognostic prediction models for acute kidney injury in hospitalized children: A systematic review.Pediatric investigation · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in hospitalized children which could rapidly progress into chronic kidney disease if not timely diagnosed. Prognostic prediction models for AKI were established to identify AKI early and improve children's prognosis. Objective: To appraise prognostic prediction models for pediatric AKI. Methods: Four English and four Chinese databases were systematically searched from January 1, 2010, to June 6, 2022. Articles describing prognostic prediction models for pediatric AKI were included. The data extraction was based on the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies checklist. The risk of bias (ROB) was assessed according to the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool guideline. The quantitative synthesis of the models was not performed due to the lack of methods regarding the meta-analysis of prediction models. Results: Eight studies with 16 models were included. There were significant deficiencies in reporting and all models were considered at high ROB. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to predict AKI ranged from 0.69 to 0.95. However, only about one-third of models have completed internal or external validation. The calibration was provided only in four models. Three models allowed easy bedside calculation or electronic automation, and two models were evaluated for their impacts on clinical practice. Interpretation: Besides the modeling algorithm, the challenges for developing prediction models for pediatric AKI reflected by the reporting deficiencies included ways of handling baseline serum creatinine and age-dependent blood biochemical indexes. Moreover, few prediction models for pediatric AKI were performed for external validation, let alone the transformation in clinical practice. Further investigation should focus on the combination of prediction models and electronic automatic alerts.
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.