ArticleBJUI compass2026
External validation of the preoperative risk evaluation for partial nephrectomy (PREP) score.
Article in BJUI compass, 2026. 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.
- External validation of the preoperative risk evaluation for partial nephrectomy (PREP) score.BJUI compass · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aims to externally validate the preoperative risk evaluation for partial nephrectomy (PREP) score, recently introduced to predict the risk of major complications after partial nephrectomy based on patient characteristics, in a large multi-institutional cohort of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) patients. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was performed on the IRB-approved, multi-institutional United States Kidney Cancer Data Network (US-KIDNET) to identify 10 154 patients who underwent RAPN from 2018 to 2025. Major complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo grade III-V within 30 days. Patients were assigned to risk categories for major complications based on weighted comorbidities, as defined by the PREP score, and the alignment of predicted complication rates with actual complication rates was evaluated. Discrimination was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Calibration was examined using the Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) goodness-of-fit test. Subgroup analysis was performed by robotic platform and surgical approach. Exploratory univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed to evaluate associations between individual PREP components and major complication rates. All computations were performed in Python (v3.8). Results: A total of 8615 patients who underwent RAPN were included in the final validation cohort. The PREP score did not perform well in this robotic surgery cohort, with limited overall discrimination (AUC 0.547; 95% CI 0.518-0.580). On calibration, the model's predicted probabilities were not well-aligned with observed outcomes (HL χ Conclusion: Our real-world external validation for the PREP score demonstrates that this score does not perform well in a large, multicentre, robotic cohort. Our findings suggest that coefficient re-estimation, rather than simple recalibration, may be required.
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.