MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159743215 · doi:10.21037/tlcr-21-109

Derivation and validation of a nomogram model for pulmonary thromboembolism in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery

2021· article· en· W3159743215 on OpenAlex
Yuping Li, Lei Shen, Junrong Ding, Dong Xie, Jian Yang, Yanfeng Zhao, Angelo Carretta, René Horsleben Petersen, Sébastien Gilbert, Yasuhiro Hida, Servet Bölükbas, Hiran C. Fernando, Gening Jiang, Yuming Zhu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Lung Cancer Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomogramMedicineLung cancerLung cancer surgeryCancerSurgeryIntensive care medicineOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A specific risk-stratification tool is needed to facilitate safe and cost-effective approaches to the prophylaxis of acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) in lung cancer surgery patients. This study aimed to develop and validate a simple nomogram model for the prediction of PTE after lung cancer surgery using readily obtainable clinical characteristics. METHODS: A total of 14,427 consecutive adult patients who underwent lung cancer surgery between January 2015 and July 2018 in our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Included in the cohort were 136 patients who developed PTE and 544 non-PTE patients. The patients were randomly divided into the derivation group (70%, 95 PTE patients and 380 non-PTE patients) and the validation group (30%, 41 PTE patients and 164 non-PTE patients). A nomogram model was developed based on the results of multivariate logistic analysis in the derivation group. The cut-off values were defined using Youden's index. The prognostic accuracy was measured by area under the curve (AUC) values. RESULTS: In the derivation group, multivariate logistic analysis was carried out to evaluate the risk score. The risk assessment model contained five variables: age [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.008-1.083, P=0.016], body mass index (95% CI: 1.077-1.319, P=0.001), operation time (95% CI: 1.002-1.014, P=0.008), the serum level of cancer antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) before surgery (95% CI: 1.019-1.111, P=0.005), and the abnormal results of compression venous ultrasonography before surgery (95% CI: 2.819-18.838, P<0.001). All of them were independent risk factors of PTE. To simplify the risk assessment model, a nomogram model was established, which showed a good predictive performance in the derivation group (AUC 0.792, 95% CI: 0.734-0.853) and in the validation group (AUC 0.813, 95% CI: 0.737-0.890). CONCLUSIONS: A high-performance nomogram was established on the risk factors for PTE in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery. The nomogram could be used to provide an individual risk assessment and guide prophylaxis decisions for patients. Further external validation of the model is needed in lung cancer surgery patients in other clinical centers.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.330 · 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