Cargando…
Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review
OBJECTIVES: Patients with severe spontaneous intracranial haemorrhages, managed in intensive care units, face ethical issues regarding the difficulty of anticipating their recovery. Prognostic tools help clinicians in counselling patients and relatives and guide therapeutic decisions. We aimed to me...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8458313/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34548347 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047279 |
_version_ | 1784571280005005312 |
---|---|
author | Simon-Pimmel, Jeanne Foucher, Yohann Léger, Maxime Feuillet, Fanny Bodet-Contentin, Laetitia Cinotti, Raphaël Frasca, Denis Dantan, Etienne |
author_facet | Simon-Pimmel, Jeanne Foucher, Yohann Léger, Maxime Feuillet, Fanny Bodet-Contentin, Laetitia Cinotti, Raphaël Frasca, Denis Dantan, Etienne |
author_sort | Simon-Pimmel, Jeanne |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Patients with severe spontaneous intracranial haemorrhages, managed in intensive care units, face ethical issues regarding the difficulty of anticipating their recovery. Prognostic tools help clinicians in counselling patients and relatives and guide therapeutic decisions. We aimed to methodologically assess prognostic tools for functional outcomes in severe spontaneous intracranial haemorrhages. DATA SOURCES: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations, we conducted a systematic review querying Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane in January 2020. STUDY SELECTION: We included development or validation of multivariate prognostic models for severe intracerebral or subarachnoid haemorrhage. DATA EXTRACTION: We evaluated the articles following the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies and Transparent Reporting of multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis statements to assess the tools’ methodological reporting. RESULTS: Of the 6149 references retrieved, we identified 85 articles eligible. We discarded 43 articles due to the absence of prognostic performance or predictor selection. Among the 42 articles included, 22 did not validate models, 6 developed and validated models and 14 only externally validated models. When adding 11 articles comparing developed models to existing ones, 25 articles externally validated models. We identified methodological pitfalls, notably the lack of adequate validations or insufficient performance levels. We finally retained three scores predicting mortality and unfavourable outcomes: the IntraCerebral Haemorrhages (ICH) score and the max-ICH score for intracerebral haemorrhages, the SubArachnoid Haemorrhage International Trialists score for subarachnoid haemorrhages. CONCLUSIONS: Although prognostic studies on intracranial haemorrhages abound in the literature, they lack methodological robustness or show incomplete reporting. Rather than developing new scores, future authors should focus on externally validating and updating existing scores with large and recent cohorts. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8458313 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84583132021-10-07 Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review Simon-Pimmel, Jeanne Foucher, Yohann Léger, Maxime Feuillet, Fanny Bodet-Contentin, Laetitia Cinotti, Raphaël Frasca, Denis Dantan, Etienne BMJ Open Intensive Care OBJECTIVES: Patients with severe spontaneous intracranial haemorrhages, managed in intensive care units, face ethical issues regarding the difficulty of anticipating their recovery. Prognostic tools help clinicians in counselling patients and relatives and guide therapeutic decisions. We aimed to methodologically assess prognostic tools for functional outcomes in severe spontaneous intracranial haemorrhages. DATA SOURCES: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations, we conducted a systematic review querying Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane in January 2020. STUDY SELECTION: We included development or validation of multivariate prognostic models for severe intracerebral or subarachnoid haemorrhage. DATA EXTRACTION: We evaluated the articles following the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies and Transparent Reporting of multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis statements to assess the tools’ methodological reporting. RESULTS: Of the 6149 references retrieved, we identified 85 articles eligible. We discarded 43 articles due to the absence of prognostic performance or predictor selection. Among the 42 articles included, 22 did not validate models, 6 developed and validated models and 14 only externally validated models. When adding 11 articles comparing developed models to existing ones, 25 articles externally validated models. We identified methodological pitfalls, notably the lack of adequate validations or insufficient performance levels. We finally retained three scores predicting mortality and unfavourable outcomes: the IntraCerebral Haemorrhages (ICH) score and the max-ICH score for intracerebral haemorrhages, the SubArachnoid Haemorrhage International Trialists score for subarachnoid haemorrhages. CONCLUSIONS: Although prognostic studies on intracranial haemorrhages abound in the literature, they lack methodological robustness or show incomplete reporting. Rather than developing new scores, future authors should focus on externally validating and updating existing scores with large and recent cohorts. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8458313/ /pubmed/34548347 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047279 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Intensive Care Simon-Pimmel, Jeanne Foucher, Yohann Léger, Maxime Feuillet, Fanny Bodet-Contentin, Laetitia Cinotti, Raphaël Frasca, Denis Dantan, Etienne Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
title | Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
title_full | Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
title_short | Methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
title_sort | methodological quality of multivariate prognostic models for intracranial haemorrhages in intensive care units: a systematic review |
topic | Intensive Care |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8458313/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34548347 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047279 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simonpimmeljeanne methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT foucheryohann methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT legermaxime methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT feuilletfanny methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT bodetcontentinlaetitia methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT cinottiraphael methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT frascadenis methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview AT dantanetienne methodologicalqualityofmultivariateprognosticmodelsforintracranialhaemorrhagesinintensivecareunitsasystematicreview |