Cargando…

Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation

ABSTRACT: Prediction models could identify infants at the greatest risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and allow targeted preventative strategies. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with external validation of identified models. Studies using predictors available before day 14 o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kwok, T’ng Chang, Batey, Natalie, Luu, Ka Ling, Prayle, Andrew, Sharkey, Don
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group US 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10356605/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36624282
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41390-022-02451-8
_version_ 1785075313990959104
author Kwok, T’ng Chang
Batey, Natalie
Luu, Ka Ling
Prayle, Andrew
Sharkey, Don
author_facet Kwok, T’ng Chang
Batey, Natalie
Luu, Ka Ling
Prayle, Andrew
Sharkey, Don
author_sort Kwok, T’ng Chang
collection PubMed
description ABSTRACT: Prediction models could identify infants at the greatest risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and allow targeted preventative strategies. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with external validation of identified models. Studies using predictors available before day 14 of life to predict BPD in very preterm infants were included. Two reviewers assessed 7628 studies for eligibility. Meta-analysis of externally validated models was followed by validation using 62,864 very preterm infants in England and Wales. A total of 64 studies using 53 prediction models were included totalling 274,407 infants (range 32–156,587/study). In all, 35 (55%) studies predated 2010; 39 (61%) were single-centre studies. A total of 97% of studies had a high risk of bias, especially in the analysis domain. Following meta-analysis of 22 BPD and 11 BPD/death composite externally validated models, Laughon’s day one model was the most promising in predicting BPD and death (C-statistic 0.76 (95% CI 0.70–0.81) and good calibration). Six models were externally validated in our cohort with C-statistics between 0.70 and 0.90 but with poor calibration. Few BPD prediction models were developed with contemporary populations, underwent external validation, or had calibration and impact analyses. Contemporary, validated, and dynamic prediction models are needed for targeted preventative strategies. IMPACT: This review aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of all BPD prediction models developed to address the uncertainty of which model is sufficiently valid and generalisable for use in clinical practice and research. Published BPD prediction models are mostly outdated, single centre and lack external validation. Laughon’s 2011 model is the most promising but more robust models, using contemporary data with external validation are needed to support better treatments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10356605
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Nature Publishing Group US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103566052023-07-21 Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation Kwok, T’ng Chang Batey, Natalie Luu, Ka Ling Prayle, Andrew Sharkey, Don Pediatr Res Systematic Review ABSTRACT: Prediction models could identify infants at the greatest risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and allow targeted preventative strategies. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with external validation of identified models. Studies using predictors available before day 14 of life to predict BPD in very preterm infants were included. Two reviewers assessed 7628 studies for eligibility. Meta-analysis of externally validated models was followed by validation using 62,864 very preterm infants in England and Wales. A total of 64 studies using 53 prediction models were included totalling 274,407 infants (range 32–156,587/study). In all, 35 (55%) studies predated 2010; 39 (61%) were single-centre studies. A total of 97% of studies had a high risk of bias, especially in the analysis domain. Following meta-analysis of 22 BPD and 11 BPD/death composite externally validated models, Laughon’s day one model was the most promising in predicting BPD and death (C-statistic 0.76 (95% CI 0.70–0.81) and good calibration). Six models were externally validated in our cohort with C-statistics between 0.70 and 0.90 but with poor calibration. Few BPD prediction models were developed with contemporary populations, underwent external validation, or had calibration and impact analyses. Contemporary, validated, and dynamic prediction models are needed for targeted preventative strategies. IMPACT: This review aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of all BPD prediction models developed to address the uncertainty of which model is sufficiently valid and generalisable for use in clinical practice and research. Published BPD prediction models are mostly outdated, single centre and lack external validation. Laughon’s 2011 model is the most promising but more robust models, using contemporary data with external validation are needed to support better treatments. Nature Publishing Group US 2023-01-09 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10356605/ /pubmed/36624282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41390-022-02451-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Kwok, T’ng Chang
Batey, Natalie
Luu, Ka Ling
Prayle, Andrew
Sharkey, Don
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
title Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
title_full Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
title_fullStr Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
title_full_unstemmed Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
title_short Bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
title_sort bronchopulmonary dysplasia prediction models: a systematic review and meta-analysis with validation
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10356605/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36624282
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41390-022-02451-8
work_keys_str_mv AT kwoktngchang bronchopulmonarydysplasiapredictionmodelsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiswithvalidation
AT bateynatalie bronchopulmonarydysplasiapredictionmodelsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiswithvalidation
AT luukaling bronchopulmonarydysplasiapredictionmodelsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiswithvalidation
AT prayleandrew bronchopulmonarydysplasiapredictionmodelsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiswithvalidation
AT sharkeydon bronchopulmonarydysplasiapredictionmodelsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiswithvalidation