In‐hospital mortality risk prediction after percutaneous coronary interventions: Validating and updating the toronto score in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the accuracy of the simple, contemporary and well-designed Toronto PCI mortality risk score in ICP-BR registry, the first Brazilian PCI multicenter registry with follow-up information. BACKGROUND: Estimating percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) mortality risk by a clinical prediction model is imperative to help physicians, patients and family members make informed clinical decisions and optimize participation in the consent process, reducing anxiety and improving quality of care. At a healthcare system level, risk prediction scores are essential to measure and benchmark performance. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2013, a cohort of 4,806 patients from the ICP-BR registry, treated with PCI in eight tertiary referral medical centers, was included in the analysis. This population was compared to 10,694 patients of the derivation dataset from the Toronto study. To assess predictive performance, an update of the model was performed by three different methods, which were compared by discrimination, calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and by calibration, assessed through Hosmer-Lemeshow (H-L) test and graphical analysis. RESULTS: Death occurred in 2.6% of patients in the ICP-BR registry and in 1.3% in the Toronto cohort. The median age was 64 and 63 years, 23.8 and 32.8% were female, 28.6 and 32.3% were diabetics, respectively. Through recalibration of intercept and slope (AUC = 0.8790; H-L P value = 0.3132), we achieved a well-calibrated and well-discriminative model. CONCLUSIONS: After updating to our dataset, we demonstrated that the Toronto PCI in-hospital mortality risk score performed well in Brazilian hospitals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".