Show simple item record

dc.contributorUniversitat Ramon Llull. Facultat de Ciències de la Salut Blanquerna
dc.contributor.authorCárdenas-Fuentes, Gabriela
dc.contributor.authorBosch de Basea Gómez, Magda
dc.contributor.authorCobo, Inés
dc.contributor.authorSubirana, Isaac
dc.contributor.authorCeresa, Mario
dc.contributor.authorFamada, Ernest
dc.contributor.authorGimeno-Santos, Elena
dc.contributor.authorDelgado-Ortiz, Laura
dc.contributor.authorFaner, Rosa
dc.contributor.authorMolina-Molina, María
dc.contributor.authorAgustí, Àlvar
dc.contributor.authorMuñoz, Xavier
dc.contributor.authorSibila, Oriol
dc.contributor.authorGea, Joaquim
dc.contributor.authorGarcia Aymerich, Judith
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-26T19:03:09Z
dc.date.available2025-03-26T19:03:09Z
dc.date.created2023-04
dc.date.issued2023-07
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/5177
dc.description.abstractObjectives To identify prognostic models which estimate the risk of critical COVID-19 in hospitalized patients and to assess their validation properties. Study Design and Setting We conducted a systematic review in Medline (up to January 2021) of studies developing or updating a model that estimated the risk of critical COVID-19, defined as death, admission to intensive care unit, and/or use of mechanical ventilation during admission. Models were validated in two datasets with different backgrounds (HM [private Spanish hospital network], n = 1,753, and ICS [public Catalan health system], n = 1,104), by assessing discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]) and calibration (plots). Results We validated 18 prognostic models. Discrimination was good in nine of them (AUCs ≥ 80%) and higher in those predicting mortality (AUCs 65%–87%) than those predicting intensive care unit admission or a composite outcome (AUCs 53%–78%). Calibration was poor in all models providing outcome's probabilities and good in four models providing a point-based score. These four models used mortality as outcome and included age, oxygen saturation, and C-reactive protein among their predictors. Conclusion The validity of models predicting critical COVID-19 by using only routinely collected predictors is variable. Four models showed good discrimination and calibration when externally validated and are recommended for their use.ca
dc.format.extent15 p.ca
dc.language.isoengca
dc.publisherElsevierca
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2023, 159: 274-288ca
dc.rights© L'autor/aca
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subject.otherCOVID-19 (Malaltia)ca
dc.subject.otherMalaltia críticaca
dc.subject.otherUnitats de cures intensivesca
dc.subject.otherPrognosica
dc.subject.otherValidació externaca
dc.subject.otherEpidemiologiaca
dc.titleValidity of prognostic models of critical COVID-19 is variable. A systematic review with external validationca
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleca
dc.rights.accessLevelinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.embargo.termscapca
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.011ca
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionca


Files in this item

 

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© L'autor/a
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Share on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare on FacebookShare on TelegramShare on WhatsappPrint