Cargando…

A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact

BACKGROUND: Predictive analytics are being used increasingly in the field of spinal surgery with the development of models to predict post-surgical complications. Predictive models should be valid, generalizable, and clinically useful. The purpose of this review was to identify existing post-surgica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Canturk, Toros C., Czikk, Daniel, Wai, Eugene K., Phan, Philippe, Stratton, Alexandra, Michalowski, Wojtek, Kingwell, Stephen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9379667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35983028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100142
_version_ 1784768719076982784
author Canturk, Toros C.
Czikk, Daniel
Wai, Eugene K.
Phan, Philippe
Stratton, Alexandra
Michalowski, Wojtek
Kingwell, Stephen
author_facet Canturk, Toros C.
Czikk, Daniel
Wai, Eugene K.
Phan, Philippe
Stratton, Alexandra
Michalowski, Wojtek
Kingwell, Stephen
author_sort Canturk, Toros C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Predictive analytics are being used increasingly in the field of spinal surgery with the development of models to predict post-surgical complications. Predictive models should be valid, generalizable, and clinically useful. The purpose of this review was to identify existing post-surgical complication prediction models for spinal surgery and to determine if these models are being adequately investigated with internal/external validation, model updating and model impact studies. METHODS: This was a scoping review of studies pertaining to models for the prediction of post-surgical complication after spinal surgery published over 10 years (2010-2020). Qualitative data was extracted from the studies to include study classification, adherence to Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) guidelines and risk of bias (ROB) assessment using the Prediction model study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Model evaluation was determined using area under the curve (AUC) when available. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was used as a basis for the search methodology in four different databases. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included in the scoping review and 80% (24/30) included model development with or without internal validation. Twenty percent (6/30) were exclusively external validation studies and only one study included an impact analysis in addition to model development and internal validation. Two studies referenced the TRIPOD guidelines and there was a high ROB in 100% of the studies using the PROBAST tool. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of post-surgical complication prediction models in spinal surgery have not undergone standardized model development and internal validation or adequate external validation and impact evaluation. As such there is uncertainty as to their validity, generalizability, and clinical utility. Future efforts should be made to use existing tools to ensure standardization in development and rigorous evaluation of prediction models in spinal surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9379667
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93796672022-08-17 A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact Canturk, Toros C. Czikk, Daniel Wai, Eugene K. Phan, Philippe Stratton, Alexandra Michalowski, Wojtek Kingwell, Stephen N Am Spine Soc J Systematic Reviews /Meta-analyses BACKGROUND: Predictive analytics are being used increasingly in the field of spinal surgery with the development of models to predict post-surgical complications. Predictive models should be valid, generalizable, and clinically useful. The purpose of this review was to identify existing post-surgical complication prediction models for spinal surgery and to determine if these models are being adequately investigated with internal/external validation, model updating and model impact studies. METHODS: This was a scoping review of studies pertaining to models for the prediction of post-surgical complication after spinal surgery published over 10 years (2010-2020). Qualitative data was extracted from the studies to include study classification, adherence to Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) guidelines and risk of bias (ROB) assessment using the Prediction model study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Model evaluation was determined using area under the curve (AUC) when available. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was used as a basis for the search methodology in four different databases. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included in the scoping review and 80% (24/30) included model development with or without internal validation. Twenty percent (6/30) were exclusively external validation studies and only one study included an impact analysis in addition to model development and internal validation. Two studies referenced the TRIPOD guidelines and there was a high ROB in 100% of the studies using the PROBAST tool. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of post-surgical complication prediction models in spinal surgery have not undergone standardized model development and internal validation or adequate external validation and impact evaluation. As such there is uncertainty as to their validity, generalizability, and clinical utility. Future efforts should be made to use existing tools to ensure standardization in development and rigorous evaluation of prediction models in spinal surgery. Elsevier 2022-07-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9379667/ /pubmed/35983028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100142 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of North American Spine Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Reviews /Meta-analyses
Canturk, Toros C.
Czikk, Daniel
Wai, Eugene K.
Phan, Philippe
Stratton, Alexandra
Michalowski, Wojtek
Kingwell, Stephen
A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact
title A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact
title_full A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact
title_fullStr A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact
title_full_unstemmed A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact
title_short A scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: An analysis of model development, validation and impact
title_sort scoping review of complication prediction models in spinal surgery: an analysis of model development, validation and impact
topic Systematic Reviews /Meta-analyses
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9379667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35983028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100142
work_keys_str_mv AT canturktorosc ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT czikkdaniel ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT waieugenek ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT phanphilippe ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT strattonalexandra ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT michalowskiwojtek ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT kingwellstephen ascopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT canturktorosc scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT czikkdaniel scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT waieugenek scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT phanphilippe scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT strattonalexandra scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT michalowskiwojtek scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact
AT kingwellstephen scopingreviewofcomplicationpredictionmodelsinspinalsurgeryananalysisofmodeldevelopmentvalidationandimpact