Clinical prognostic models for severe dengue: a systematic review protocol

Background: Dengue is a common mosquito-borne, with high morbidity rates recorded in the annual. Dengue contributes to a major disease burden in many tropical countries. This demonstrates the urgent need in developing effective approaches to identify severe cases early. For this purpose, many multivariable prognostic models using multiple prognostic variables were developed to predict the risk of progression to severe outcomes. The aim of the planned systematic review is to identify and describe the existing clinical multivariable prognostic models for severe dengue as well as examine the possibility of combining them. These findings will suggest directions for further research of this field. Methods: This protocol has followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta – Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P). We will conduct a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria include being published in peer-review journals, focusing on human subjects and developing the multivariable prognostic model for severe dengue, without any restriction on language, location and period of publication, and study design. The reference list will be captured and removed from duplications. We will use the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist to extract data and Prediction study risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST) to assess the study quality. Discussion: This systematic review will describe the existing prediction models, summarize the current status of prognostic research on dengue, and report the possibility to combine the models to optimize the power of each paradigm. PROSPERO registration: CRD42018102907

Download Full-text

Clinical prognostic models for severe dengue: a systematic review protocol

Wellcome Open Research ◽

10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15033.1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 4 ◽

pp. 12

Author(s):

Thang Dao Phuoc ◽

Long Khuong Quynh ◽

Linh Vien Dang Khanh ◽

Thinh Ong Phuc ◽

Hieu Le Sy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Human Subjects ◽

Prognostic Models ◽

Current Status ◽

Severe Dengue ◽

High Morbidity ◽

Reference List

Background: Dengue is a common mosquito-borne, with high morbidity rates recorded in the annually. Dengue contributes a major disease burden in many tropical countries. This demonstrates the urgent need in developing effective approaches to identify severe cases early. For this purpose, many multivariable prognostic models using multiple prognostic variables were developed to predict the risk of progression to severe outcomes. The aim of the planned systematic review is to identify and describe the existing clinical multivariable prognostic models for severe dengue as well as examine the possibility of combining them. These findings will suggest directions for further research of this field. Methods: This protocol has followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta – Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P). We will conduct a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science. Eligiblity criteria include being published in peer-review journals, focusing on human subjects and developing the multivariable prognostic model for severe dengue, without any restriction on language, location and period of publication, and study design. The reference list will be captured and removed from duplications. We will use the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist to extract data and Prediction study risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST) to assess the study quality. Discussion: This systematic review will describe the existing prediction models, summarize the current status of prognostic research on dengue, and report the possibility to combine the models to optimize the power of each paradigm. PROSPERO registration: CRD42018102907

Download Full-text

Prognostic models for predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in resource-limited countries: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035045 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (10) ◽

pp. e035045

Author(s):

Morris Ogero ◽

Rachel Jelagat Sarguta ◽

Lucas Malla ◽

Jalemba Aluvaala ◽

Ambrose Agweyu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Low Income ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Model Development ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Prognostic Models ◽

Risk Scores ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Bias Assessment

ObjectivesTo identify and appraise the methodological rigour of multivariable prognostic models predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).DesignSystematic review of peer-reviewed journals.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and Web of Science electronic databases since inception to August 2019.Eligibility criteriaWe included model development studies predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in LMIC.Data extraction and synthesisThis systematic review followed the Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies framework. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). No quantitative summary was conducted due to substantial heterogeneity that was observed after assessing the studies included.ResultsOur search strategy identified a total of 4054 unique articles. Among these, 3545 articles were excluded after review of titles and abstracts as they covered non-relevant topics. Full texts of 509 articles were screened for eligibility, of which 15 studies reporting 21 models met the eligibility criteria. Based on the PROBAST tool, risk of bias was assessed in four domains; participant, predictors, outcome and analyses. The domain of statistical analyses was the main area of concern where none of the included models was judged to be of low risk of bias.ConclusionThis review identified 21 models predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in LMIC. However, most reports characterising these models are of poor quality when judged against recent reporting standards due to a high risk of bias. Future studies should adhere to standardised methodological criteria and progress from identifying new risk scores to validating or adapting existing scores.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018088599.

Download Full-text

A systematic review of prediction models to diagnose COVID-19 in adults admitted to healthcare centers

Archives of Public Health ◽

10.1186/s13690-021-00630-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 79 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Médéa Locquet ◽

Anh Nguyet Diep ◽

Charlotte Beaudart ◽

Nadia Dardenne ◽

Christian Brabant ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Care ◽

High Risk ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Medical Setting ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Hospital System ◽

Model Study

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic is putting significant pressure on the hospital system. To help clinicians in the rapid triage of patients at high risk of COVID-19 while waiting for RT-PCR results, different diagnostic prediction models have been developed. Our objective is to identify, compare, and evaluate performances of prediction models for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in adult patients in a health care setting. Methods A search for relevant references has been conducted on the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. Rigorous eligibility criteria have been established (e.g., adult participants, suspicion of COVID-19, medical setting) and applied by two independent investigators to identify suitable studies at 2 different stages: (1) titles and abstracts screening and (2) full-texts screening. Risk of bias (RoB) has been assessed using the Prediction model study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Data synthesis has been presented according to a narrative report of findings. Results Out of the 2334 references identified by the literature search, 13 articles have been included in our systematic review. The studies, carried out all over the world, were performed in 2020. The included articles proposed a model developed using different methods, namely, logistic regression, score, machine learning, XGBoost. All the included models performed well to discriminate adults at high risks of presenting COVID-19 (all area under the ROC curve (AUROC) > 0.500). The best AUROC was observed for the model of Kurstjens et al (AUROC = 0.940 (0.910–0.960), which was also the model that achieved the highest sensitivity (98%). RoB was evaluated as low in general. Conclusion Thirteen models have been developed since the start of the pandemic in order to diagnose COVID-19 in suspected patients from health care centers. All these models are effective, to varying degrees, in identifying whether patients were at high risk of having COVID-19.

Download Full-text

Prediction Models for Future High-Need High-Cost Healthcare Use: a Systematic Review

Journal of General Internal Medicine ◽

10.1007/s11606-021-07333-z ◽

2022 ◽

Author(s):

Ursula W. de Ruijter ◽

Z. L. Rana Kaplan ◽

Wichor M. Bramer ◽

Frank Eijkenaar ◽

Daan Nieboer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Care Management ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Model Performance ◽

Case Finding ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Prognostic Models ◽

Healthcare Use

Abstract Background In an effort to improve both quality of care and cost-effectiveness, various care-management programmes have been developed for high-need high-cost (HNHC) patients. Early identification of patients at risk of becoming HNHC (i.e. case finding) is crucial to a programme’s success. We aim to systematically identify prediction models predicting future HNHC healthcare use in adults, to describe their predictive performance and to assess their applicability. Methods Ovid MEDLINE® All, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Google Scholar were systematically searched from inception through January 31, 2021. Risk of bias and methodological quality assessment was performed through the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Results Of 5890 studies, 60 studies met inclusion criteria. Within these studies, 313 unique models were presented using a median development cohort size of 20,248 patients (IQR 5601–174,242). Predictors were derived from a combination of data sources, most often claims data (n = 37; 62%) and patient survey data (n = 29; 48%). Most studies (n = 36; 60%) estimated patients’ risk to become part of some top percentage of the cost distribution (top-1–20%) within a mean time horizon of 16 months (range 12–60). Five studies (8%) predicted HNHC persistence over multiple years. Model validation was performed in 45 studies (76%). Model performance in terms of both calibration and discrimination was reported in 14 studies (23%). Overall risk of bias was rated as ‘high’ in 40 studies (67%), mostly due to a ‘high’ risk of bias in the subdomain ‘Analysis’ (n = 37; 62%). Discussion This is the first systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42020164734) of non-proprietary prognostic models predicting HNHC healthcare use. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity. Most identified models estimated a patient’s risk to incur high healthcare expenditure during the subsequent year. However, case-finding strategies for HNHC care-management programmes are best informed by a model predicting HNHC persistence. Therefore, future studies should not only focus on validating and extending existing models, but also concentrate on clinical usefulness.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of instantaneous wave-free ratio in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017868 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (9) ◽

pp. e017868

Author(s):

Joey S.W. Kwong ◽

Sheyu Li ◽

Wan-Jie Gu ◽

Hao Chen ◽

Chao Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Adverse Outcomes ◽

Coronary Revascularisation ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Registration Number ◽

Collection Form ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionEffective selection of coronary lesions for revascularisation is pivotal in the management of symptoms and adverse outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. Recently, instantaneous ‘wave-free’ ratio (iFR) has been proposed as a new diagnostic index for assessing the severity of coronary stenoses without the need of pharmacological vasodilation. Evidence of the effectiveness of iFR-guided revascularisation is emerging and a systematic review is warranted.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and controlled observational studies. Electronic sources including MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for potentially eligible studies investigating the effects of iFR-guided strategy in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation. Studies will be selected against transparent eligibility criteria and data will be extracted using a prestandardised data collection form by two independent authors. Risk of bias in included studies and overall quality of evidence will be assessed using validated methodological tools. Meta-analysis will be performed using the Review Manager software. Our systematic review will be performed according to the guidance from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. Results of the systematic review will be disseminated as conference proceedings and peer-reviewed journal publication.Trial registration numberThis protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42017065460.

Download Full-text

Programme frequency, type, time and duration do not explain the effects of balance exercise in older adults: a systematic review with a meta-regression analysis

British Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1136/bjsports-2016-096874 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 53 (16) ◽

pp. 996-1002 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Melanie K Farlie ◽

Lauren Robins ◽

Romi Haas ◽

Jennifer L Keating ◽

Elizabeth Molloy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Older Adults ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Centre Of Mass ◽

Randomised Trials ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Exercise Interventions ◽

Balance Exercise ◽

Control Centre ◽

Meta Analyses

ObjectiveThe objective of this systematic review was to examine the effects of different balance exercise interventions compared with non-balance exercise controls on balance task performance in older adults.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesMedline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched until July 2017.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesSystematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomised trials of balance exercise interventions for older adults were identified for extraction of eligible randomised trials. Eligibility criteria for inclusion of randomised trials in meta-analyses were comparison of a balance exercise intervention with a control group that did not perform balance exercises, report of at least one end-intervention balance outcome measurement that was consistent with the five subgroups of balance exercise identified, and full-text article available in English.ResultsNinety-five trials were included in meta-analyses and 80 in meta-regressions. For four balance exercise types (control centre of mass, multidimensional, mobility and reaching), significant effects for balance exercise interventions were found in meta-analyses (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.31–0.50), however with considerable heterogeneity in observed effects (I2: 50.4%–80.6%). Risk of bias assessments (Physiotherapy Evidence Database score and funnel plots) did not explain heterogeneity. One significant relationship identified in the meta-regressions of SMD and balance exercise frequency, time and duration explained 2.1% of variance for the control centre of mass subgroup.ConclusionLimitations to this study included the variability in design of balance interventions, incomplete reporting of data and statistical heterogeneity. The design of balance exercise programmes provides inadequate explanation of the observed benefits of these interventions.

Download Full-text

Panoramic versus CBCT used to reduce inferior alveolar nerve paresthesia after third molar extractions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology ◽

10.1259/dmfr.20190265 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 49 (4) ◽

pp. 20190265

Author(s):

Nathalia Calzavara Del Lhano ◽

Rosangela Almeida Ribeiro ◽

Carolina Castro Martins ◽

Neuza Maria Souza Picorelli Assis ◽

Karina Lopes Devito

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Panoramic Radiography ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽

Third Molar ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Third Molar Surgery ◽

Reference List ◽

Significant Heterogeneity ◽

Eligibility Criteria

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to verify whether CBCT in comparison with panoramic radiography reduced the cases of temporary paresthesias of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) associated with third molar extractions. Methods: The literature search included five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, SciELO), in addition to gray literature and hand search of reference list of included studies. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts, and full texts according to eligibility criteria, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias through Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials (RoB 2.0). Data were meta-analyzed by comparing CBCT versus panoramic radiographs for number of events (temporary paresthesia after third molar surgery). Fixed effect model was used for non-significant heterogeneity; relative risk (RR) and 95% CI were calculated. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in meta-analysis, and for the majority of domains they presented low risk of bias. RR was 1.23 (95% IC: 0.75–2.02; I2: 0%; p = 0.43) favouring panoramic radiography, but without significant effect, and with moderate certainty of evidence. Conclusions: We concluded that both interventions had a similar ability to reduce temporary paresthesia of the IAN after third molar surgery with moderate certainty of evidence.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of return to activity and return to school protocols for children postconcussion: a systematic review

BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine ◽

10.1136/bmjsem-2019-000667 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. e000667 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Carol DeMatteo ◽

E Dimitra Bednar ◽

Sarah Randall ◽

Katie Falla

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Paediatric Population ◽

Acute Stage ◽

Current Data ◽

Return To School ◽

Original Research ◽

Reference List ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Outcomes For Children ◽

Return To Activity

ObjectiveTo determine the effects of following return to activity (RTA) and return to school (RTS) protocols on clinical outcomes for children with concussion. The 12 subquestions of this review focus on the effectiveness of protocols, guidelines and recommendations, and the evidence supporting content of the protocols including rest, exercise and school accommodations.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC and manual reference list check.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies were included if they evaluated RTA or RTS protocols in children aged 5–18 years with a concussion or if they reported a rigorous study design that provided evidence for the recommendations. Included studies were original research or systematic reviews. Articles were excluded if they did not report on their methodology or included participants with significant neurological comorbidities.ResultsThe literature search retrieved 198 non-duplicate articles and a total of 13 articles were included in this review. Despite the adoption of several RTS and RTA protocols in clinical practice there is little evidence to determine their efficacy in the paediatric population.SummaryThe current data support the recommendation that children in the acute stage postconcussion should undergo 1–2 days physical and cognitive rest as they initiate graduated RTA/RTS protocols. Prolonged rest may increase reported symptoms and time to recovery. Further interventional studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of RTA/RTS protocols in youth with concussion.

Download Full-text

Predicting major adverse cardiovascular events for secondary prevention: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk prediction models

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034564 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (7) ◽

pp. e034564

Author(s):

Ralph K Akyea ◽

Jo Leonardi-Bee ◽

Folkert W Asselbergs ◽

Riyaz S Patel ◽

Paul Durrington ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Secondary Prevention ◽

Cardiovascular Events ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Prognostic Models ◽

Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽

Bibliographic Databases ◽

Analysis Model

IntroductionCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. With advances in early diagnosis and treatment of CVD and increasing life expectancy, more people are surviving initial CVD events. However, models for stratifying disease severity risk in patients with established CVD for effective secondary prevention strategies are inadequate. Multivariable prognostic models to stratify CVD risk may allow personalised treatment interventions. This review aims to systematically review the existing multivariable prognostic models for the recurrence of CVD or major adverse cardiovascular events in adults with established CVD diagnosis.Methods and analysisBibliographic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science) will be searched, from database inception to April 2020, using terms relating to the clinical area and prognosis. A hand search of the reference lists of included studies will also be done to identify additional published studies. No restrictions on language of publications will be applied. Eligible studies present multivariable models (derived or validated) of adults (aged 16 years and over) with an established diagnosis of CVD, reporting at least one of the components of the primary outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events (defined as either coronary heart disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease, heart failure or CVD-related mortality). Reviewing will be done by two reviewers independently using the pre-defined criteria. Data will be extracted for included full-text articles. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Prediction model study Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). Prognostic models will be summarised narratively. If a model is tested in multiple validation studies, the predictive performance will be summarised using a random-effects meta-analysis model to account for any between-study heterogeneity.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. The results of this study will be submitted to relevant conferences for presentation and a peer-reviewed journal for publication.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019149111.

Download Full-text

Comparison of prognostic models to predict the occurrence of colorectal cancer in asymptomatic individuals: a systematic literature review and external validation in the EPIC and UK Biobank prospective cohort studies

Gut ◽

10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315730 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 68 (4) ◽

pp. 672-683 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Todd Smith ◽

David C Muller ◽

Karel G M Moons ◽

Amanda J Cross ◽

Mattias Johansson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Prediction Models ◽

Large Population ◽

External Validation ◽

Population Based ◽

Prognostic Models ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Asymptomatic Individuals ◽

The Uk

ObjectiveTo systematically identify and validate published colorectal cancer risk prediction models that do not require invasive testing in two large population-based prospective cohorts.DesignModels were identified through an update of a published systematic review and validated in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) and the UK Biobank. The performance of the models to predict the occurrence of colorectal cancer within 5 or 10 years after study enrolment was assessed by discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration (plots of observed vs predicted probability).ResultsThe systematic review and its update identified 16 models from 8 publications (8 colorectal, 5 colon and 3 rectal). The number of participants included in each model validation ranged from 41 587 to 396 515, and the number of cases ranged from 115 to 1781. Eligible and ineligible participants across the models were largely comparable. Calibration of the models, where assessable, was very good and further improved by recalibration. The C-statistics of the models were largely similar between validation cohorts with the highest values achieved being 0.70 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.72) in the UK Biobank and 0.71 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.74) in EPIC.ConclusionSeveral of these non-invasive models exhibited good calibration and discrimination within both external validation populations and are therefore potentially suitable candidates for the facilitation of risk stratification in population-based colorectal screening programmes. Future work should both evaluate this potential, through modelling and impact studies, and ascertain if further enhancement in their performance can be obtained.

Download Full-text