MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510914644 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000001541

Development of a Pediatric Risk Assessment Score to Predict Perioperative Mortality in Children Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery

2016· article· en· W2510914644 on OpenAlexaff
Viviane G. Nasr, James A. DiNardo, David Faraoni

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortReceiver operating characteristicPerioperativeLogistic regressionConfidence intervalCohort studyRisk assessmentInternal medicineEmergency medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although there have been numerous attempts to predict perioperative mortality in adults, an objective model to predict mortality in children has not been developed. In this study, we aimed to develop a Pediatric Risk Assessment (PRAm) score to predict perioperative mortality in children undergoing noncardiac surgery. METHODS: We included all children recorded in the 2012 and 2013 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric databases in a derivation cohort and those from the 2014 database in a validation cohort. The primary outcome was the incidence of in-hospital mortality. A total of 115,229 (63%) were included in the derivation cohort and 68,194 (37%) in the validation cohort. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine the predictors for mortality and designed the PRAm score. RESULTS: On the basis of the multivariable regression model, we created a simplified risk assessment tool (PRAm score) ranging from 0 to ≥9, including the presence of any comorbidities, factors of critical illness, age <12 months, the requirement for an urgent procedure, and the diagnosis of a neoplasm. The PRAm score showed an excellent discriminative ability with an apparent "optimistic" area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.950 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.942-0.957) in the derivation cohort. In the validation cohort, we observed similar performances with an area under the "naive" receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.950 (95% CI, 0.938-0.961). The AUC was also calculated from a bootstrap procedure and then applied to the original derivation sample to estimate "optimism" for each bootstrap sample with an AUC of 0.943 (95% CI, 0.929-0.9956). The optimism in apparent performance was 0.007, corresponding to an optimism-corrected area of 0.943. Calibration was assessed graphically by plotting the observed outcome against the predicted mortality (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.995, calibration in the large = 0.001 [P = .974], calibration slope = 0.927). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we developed a simplified PRAm tool (PRAm score) as a predictor of perioperative mortality in children undergoing noncardiac surgery. The PRAm score has excellent accuracy. In patients assigned American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification ≥4, there is wide variability in objectively obtained PRAm scores.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations81
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207