Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Morbidity in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery: An Institutional Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Utilizing the intrinsic surgical risk (ISR) and the patient's chronic and acute conditions, this study aims to develop and validate a comprehensive predictive model of perioperative morbidity in children undergoing noncardiac surgery. METHODS: Following institutional review board (IRB) approval at a tertiary care children's hospital, data for all noncardiac surgical encounters for a derivation dataset from July 2017 to December 2018 including 16,724 cases and for a validation dataset from January 2019 to December 2019 including 9043 cases were collected retrospectively. The primary outcome was a composite morbidity score defined by unplanned transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU), acute respiratory failure requiring intubation, postoperative need for noninvasive or invasive positive pressure ventilation, or cardiac arrest. Internal model validation was performed using 1000 bootstrap resamples, and external validation was performed using the 2019 validation cohort. RESULTS: A total of 1519 surgical cases (9.1%) experienced the defined composite morbidity. Using multivariable logistic regression, the Risk Assessment of Morbidity in Pediatric Surgery (RAMPS) score was developed with very good predictive ability in the derivation cohort (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.805; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.795-0.816), very good internal validity using 1000 bootstrap resamples (bias-corrected Nagelkerke R = 0.21 and Brier score = 0.07), and good external validity (AUC = 0.783; 95% CI, 0.770-0.797). The included variables are age <5 years, critically ill, chronic condition indicator (CCI) ≥3, significant CCI ≥2, and ISR quartile ≥3. The RAMPS score ranges from 0 to 10, with the risk of composite morbidity ranging from 1.8% to 42.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The RAMPS score provides the ability to identify a high-risk cohort of pediatric patients using a 5-component tool, and it demonstrated good internal and external validity and generalizability. It also provides an opportunity to improve perioperative planning with the intent of improving both individual-patient outcomes and the appropriate allocation of health care resources.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".