99 PELOD-2: An Update of the Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background and aims</h3> Organ dysfunction scores, such as the PEdiatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction (PELOD) score developed in 1999, are primarily designed to describe the severity of organ dysfunction. This study was undertaken to update and improve the PELOD score, using a larger and more recent dataset. <h3>Methods</h3> We did a prospective, observational, multicentre cohort study in nine French-speaking multidisciplinary, tertiary-care PICUs of university-affiliated hospitals between June 2006 and October 2007. We collected data on variables considered for the PELOD-2 score at seven time-points after PICU admission: days 1, 2, 5, 8, 12, 16 and 18, plus PICU discharge. For each variable, the most abnormal value observed during each time point was collected. Identification of the best variable cutoffs was performed using bivariate, multivariate regressions and bootstrap process. The outcome was vital status at PICU discharge. We used area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to evaluate discrimination and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test to evaluate calibration. <h3>Results</h3> We included 3671 consecutive patients (median age 15.5 months IQR 2.2–70.7). Mortality rate was 6.0% (222 deaths). Discrimination and calibration of the PELOD 2 score were 0.93 and 9.31 (p=0.317) respectively. <h3>Conclusion</h3> We developed and validated the PELOD-2 score, which allows assessment of the severity of cases of MODS in PICU with a continuous scale. The score will be in the public domain, which means that it can be freely used in clinical trials.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".