MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345968422 · doi:10.3171/2015.10.spine14582

Use of the modified frailty index to predict 30-day morbidity and mortality from spine surgery

2016· article· en· W2345968422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rushna Ali, Jason M. Schwalb, David R. Nerenz, Heath J. Antoine, Ilan Rubinfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Spine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCurrent Procedural TerminologyPerioperativeDeliriumComplicationHeart failureSurgeryMortality rateRespiratory failureCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE Limited tools exist to stratify perioperative risk in patients undergoing spinal procedures. The modified frailty index (mFI) based on the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Frailty Index (CSHA-FI), constructed from standard demographic variables, has been applied to various other surgical populations for risk stratification. The authors hypothesized that it would be predictive of postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing spine surgery. METHODS The 2006-2010 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data set was accessed for patients undergoing spine surgeries based on Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Sixteen preoperative clinical NSQIP variables were matched to 11 CSHA-FI variables (changes in daily activities, gastrointestinal problems, respiratory problems, clouding or delirium, hypertension, coronary artery and peripheral vascular disease, congestive heart failure, and so on). The outcomes assessed were 30-day occurrences of adverse events. These were then summarized in groups: any infection, wound-related complication, Clavien IV complications (life-threatening, requiring ICU admission), and mortality. RESULTS A total of 18,294 patients were identified. In 8.1% of patients with an mFI of 0 there was at least one morbid complication, compared with 24.3% of patients with an mFI of ≥ 0.27 (p < 0.001). An mFI of 0 was associated with a mortality rate of 0.1%, compared with 2.3% for an mFI of ≥ 0.27 (p < 0.001). Patients with an mFI of 0 had a 1.7% rate of surgical site infections and a 0.8% rate of Clavien IV complications, whereas patients with an mFI of ≥ 0.27 had rates of 4.1% and 7.1% for surgical site infections and Clavien IV complications, respectively (p < 0.001 for both). Multivariate analysis showed that the preoperative mFI and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of ≥ III had a significantly increased risk of leading to Clavien IV complications and death. CONCLUSIONS A higher mFI was associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality, providing an additional tool to improve perioperative risk stratification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations246
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery SpineSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207