ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Prediction of 1-year post-operative mortality in elderly patients with fragility hip fractures in China: evaluation of risk prediction models.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Application of deep learning-clinical baseline feature fusion model to predict postoperative mortality in elderly patients with hip fracture: a multicenter study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Prealbumin Adjusted Prognostic Nutritional Index May Predict the Postoperative Survival and Free Walking Abilities of Patients with Hip Fractures: A Multi-Center Follow-Up Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study systematically evaluates the predictive capacity of seven risk stratification models for 12-month postoperative mortality in geriatric patients with fragility hip fractures, while concurrently assessing their risk classification accuracy to inform perioperative protocol formulation, rehabilitation strategies, and prognostic management. Introduction: Current clinical practice lacks standardized criteria for mortality risk prediction in elderly fragility hip fracture patients. This investigation conducts a comparative evaluation of seven prognostic models-the Sernbo Score, Jiang et al. model, Nottingham Hip Fracture Score ( Methods: In this retrospective cohort analysis, all consecutive patients aged isk prediction in elderly fragility hip fracture between January 2018 and October 2022 were enrolled. Model-derived mortality predictions and risk categorizations were computed. Predictive performance was quantified through the predictive validity, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) analysis, DeLong test, Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit testing and calibration slope (95% CI), followed by precision assessment of risk stratification tiers. Results: The cohort demonstrated a 12-month mortality rate of 29.0%. Kaplan-Meier survival curves identified the first postoperative year as the highest mortality risk period. The ASAgeCoGeCC Score was the only model in this study that simultaneously demonstrated balanced sensitivity (0.73)/specificity (0.82), excellent discrimination (AUC = 0.84), and good calibration (H-L Conclusion: ASAgeCoGeCC score, NHFS and Holt et al.showed acceptable predictive performance, where the first two are applicable to clinical rapid decision-making, while NHFS has been extensively external validated. Holt et al.is more suitable for a well-resourced medical system. SHiPS displayed optimal risk categorization accuracy, suggesting potential for broader clinical implementation. These findings necessitate verification through prospective multi-center studies.
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.