ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Validation of a risk-prediction model for pediatric post-discharge mortality after hospital admission for infection in Rwanda: A prospective cohort study.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing approaches to identify young children at risk for post-discharge mortality: Protocol for a prospective observational cohort study in Western Kenya.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Article
- Validation of a risk-prediction model for pediatric post-discharge mortality after hospital admission for infection in Rwanda: A prospective cohort study.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Post-discharge mortality in suspected pediatric sepsis: Insights from rural and urban healthcare settings in Rwanda.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Systematic review of risk assessment tools for post-discharge mortality among children in sub-Saharan Africa.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mortality following hospital discharge remains a significant threat to child health, particularly in resource-limited settings. The Smart Discharges risk-prediction models use simple clinical, socio-behavioral, and point-of-care lab test variables to successfully predict children at the highest risk of death after hospital admission for infection to guide a risk-based approach to post-discharge care. In Rwanda, we externally validated five models derived from the prior Smart Discharges Uganda studies in a new cohort of children ages 0 days to 60 months admitted for suspected sepsis at two hospitals. We evaluated model performance using metrics including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), Brier score, and test characteristics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity). Performance was visualized through ROC and gain curves and calibration plots. Of 1218 total children (n = 413, Kigali; n = 805, Ruhengeri), 1161 lived to discharge (95.3%) and 1123 of those completed 6-month follow-up (96.7%). The overall rate of post-discharge mortality was 4.8% (n = 58). All five prediction models tested achieved an area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC) greater than 0.7 (range 0.706 - 0.738). Low outcome rates resulted in moderately wide confidence intervals. Model degradation ranged from 1.1% to 7.7%, as determined by the percent reduction in AUROC between the internal validation of the original Ugandan cohort and the external Rwandan cohort. Calibration plots showed good calibration for all models at predicted probabilities below 10%. There were too few outcomes to assess calibration among those at the highest predicted risk levels. Discrimination was good with minimal degradation of the model despite low outcome rates. Future work to assess model calibration among the highest risk groups is required to ensure models are broadly generalizable to all children with suspected sepsis in Rwanda and in similar, resource-limited settings.
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.