Cargando…
Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability
INTRODUCTION: Clinical prediction and decision tools that generate outcome-based risk stratification and/or intervention recommendations are prevalent. Appropriate use and validity of these tools, especially those that inform complex clinical decisions, remains unclear. The objective of this study w...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9762565/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36534692 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279294 |
_version_ | 1784852888522063872 |
---|---|
author | Soleimanpour, Neeloofar Bann, Maralyssa |
author_facet | Soleimanpour, Neeloofar Bann, Maralyssa |
author_sort | Soleimanpour, Neeloofar |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Clinical prediction and decision tools that generate outcome-based risk stratification and/or intervention recommendations are prevalent. Appropriate use and validity of these tools, especially those that inform complex clinical decisions, remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the methodologic quality and applicability of clinical risk scoring tools used to guide hospitalization decision-making. METHODS: In February 2021, a comprehensive search was performed of a clinical calculator online database (mdcalc.com) that is publicly available and well-known to clinicians. The primary reference for any calculator tool informing outpatient versus inpatient disposition was considered for inclusion. Studies were restricted to the adult, acute care population. Those focused on obstetrics/gynecology or critical care admission were excluded. The Wasson-Laupacis framework of methodologic standards for clinical prediction rules was applied to each study. RESULTS: A total of 22 calculators provided hospital admission recommendations for 9 discrete medical conditions using adverse events (14/22), mortality (6/22), or confirmatory diagnosis (2/22) as outcomes of interest. The most commonly met methodologic standards included mathematical technique description (22/22) and clinical sensibility (22/22) and least commonly met included reproducibility of the rule (1/22) and measurement of effect on clinical use (1/22). Description of the studied population was often lacking, especially patient race/ethnicity (2/22) and mental or behavioral health (0/22). Only one study reported any item related to social determinants of health. CONCLUSION: Studies commonly do not meet rigorous methodologic standards and often fail to report pertinent details that would guide applicability. These clinical tools focus primarily on specific disease entities and clinical variables, missing the breadth of information necessary to make a disposition determination and raise significant validation and generalizability concerns. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9762565 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97625652022-12-20 Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability Soleimanpour, Neeloofar Bann, Maralyssa PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Clinical prediction and decision tools that generate outcome-based risk stratification and/or intervention recommendations are prevalent. Appropriate use and validity of these tools, especially those that inform complex clinical decisions, remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the methodologic quality and applicability of clinical risk scoring tools used to guide hospitalization decision-making. METHODS: In February 2021, a comprehensive search was performed of a clinical calculator online database (mdcalc.com) that is publicly available and well-known to clinicians. The primary reference for any calculator tool informing outpatient versus inpatient disposition was considered for inclusion. Studies were restricted to the adult, acute care population. Those focused on obstetrics/gynecology or critical care admission were excluded. The Wasson-Laupacis framework of methodologic standards for clinical prediction rules was applied to each study. RESULTS: A total of 22 calculators provided hospital admission recommendations for 9 discrete medical conditions using adverse events (14/22), mortality (6/22), or confirmatory diagnosis (2/22) as outcomes of interest. The most commonly met methodologic standards included mathematical technique description (22/22) and clinical sensibility (22/22) and least commonly met included reproducibility of the rule (1/22) and measurement of effect on clinical use (1/22). Description of the studied population was often lacking, especially patient race/ethnicity (2/22) and mental or behavioral health (0/22). Only one study reported any item related to social determinants of health. CONCLUSION: Studies commonly do not meet rigorous methodologic standards and often fail to report pertinent details that would guide applicability. These clinical tools focus primarily on specific disease entities and clinical variables, missing the breadth of information necessary to make a disposition determination and raise significant validation and generalizability concerns. Public Library of Science 2022-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9762565/ /pubmed/36534692 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279294 Text en © 2022 Soleimanpour, Bann https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Soleimanpour, Neeloofar Bann, Maralyssa Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
title | Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
title_full | Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
title_fullStr | Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
title_short | Clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: A methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
title_sort | clinical risk calculators informing the decision to admit: a methodologic evaluation and assessment of applicability |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9762565/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36534692 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279294 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT soleimanpourneeloofar clinicalriskcalculatorsinformingthedecisiontoadmitamethodologicevaluationandassessmentofapplicability AT bannmaralyssa clinicalriskcalculatorsinformingthedecisiontoadmitamethodologicevaluationandassessmentofapplicability |