MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321251974 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1126123

Frailty as a predictor of neurosurgical outcomes in brain tumor patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4321251974 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jinfeng Zhu, Xichenhui Qiu, Cuiling Ji, Fang Wang, An Tao, Lu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChecklistMeta-analysisSystematic reviewCritical appraisalMEDLINEHazard ratioOdds ratioPerioperativeEmergency medicineInternal medicineConfidence intervalSurgeryAlternative medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Patients with frailty are at a high risk of poor health outcomes, and frailty has been explored as a predictor of adverse events, such as perioperative complications, readmissions, falls, disability, and mortality in the neurosurgical literature. However, the precise relationship between frailty and neurosurgical outcomes in patients with brain tumor has not been established, and thus evidence-based advancements in neurosurgical management. The objectives of this study are to describe existing evidence and conduct the first systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between frailty and neurosurgical outcomes among brain tumor patients. Methods Seven English databases and four Chinese databases were searched to identify neurosurgical outcomes and the prevalence of frailty among patients with a brain tumor, with no restrictions on the publication period. According to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, two independent reviewers employed the Newcastle–Ottawa scale in cohort studies and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cross-sectional Studies to evaluate the methodological quality of each study. Then random-effects or fixed-effects meta-analysis was used in combining odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (RR) for the categorical data and continuous data of neurosurgical outcomes. The primary outcomes are mortality and postoperative complications, and secondary outcomes include readmission, discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. Results A total of 13 papers were included in the systematic review, and the prevalence of frailty ranged from 1.48 to 57%. Frailty was significantly associated with increased risk of mortality (OR = 1.63; CI = 1.33–1.98; p < 0.001), postoperative complications (OR = 1.48; CI = 1.40–1.55; p < 0.001; I 2 = 33%), nonroutine discharge disposition to a facility other than home (OR = 1.72; CI = 1.41–2.11; p < 0.001), prolonged LOS (OR = 1.25; CI = 1.09–1.43; p = 0.001), and high hospitalization costs among brain tumor patients. However, frailty was not independently associated with readmission (OR = 0.99; CI = 0.96–1.03; p = 0.74). Conclusion Frailty is an independent predictor of mortality, postoperative complications, nonroutine discharge disposition, LOS, and hospitalization costs among brain tumor patients. In addition, frailty plays a significant potential role in risk stratification, preoperative shared decision making, and perioperative management. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021248424

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207