Risk prediction models for mortality in community-acquired pneumonia

a systematic review

Chun Shing Kwok, Yoon K Loke, Kenneth Woo, Phyo Kyaw Myint

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background. Several models have been developed to predict the risk of mortality in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aims to systematically identify and evaluate the performance of published risk prediction models for CAP. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library in November 2011 for initial derivation and validation studies for models which predict pneumonia mortality. We aimed to present the comparative usefulness of their mortality prediction. Results. We identified 20 different published risk prediction models for mortality in CAP. Four models relied on clinical variables that could be assessed in community settings, with the two validated models BTS1 and CRB-65 showing fairly similar balanced accuracy levels (0.77 and 0.72, resp.), while CRB-65 had AUROC of 0.78. Nine models required laboratory tests in addition to clinical variables, and the best performance levels amongst the validated models were those of CURB and CURB-65 (balanced accuracy 0.73 and 0.71, resp.), with CURB-65 having an AUROC of 0.79. The PSI (AUROC 0.82) was the only validated model with good discriminative ability among the four that relied on clinical, laboratorial, and radiological variables. Conclusions. There is no convincing evidence that other risk prediction models improve upon the well-established CURB-65 and PSI models.
Original languageEnglish
Article number504136
Number of pages12
JournalBioMed Research International
Volume2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Pneumonia
Mortality
Validation Studies
MEDLINE
Libraries

Cite this

Risk prediction models for mortality in community-acquired pneumonia : a systematic review. / Kwok, Chun Shing; Loke, Yoon K; Woo, Kenneth; Myint, Phyo Kyaw.

In: BioMed Research International , Vol. 2013, 504136, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a1c46d6bfe104a949129b689000baa7b,
title = "Risk prediction models for mortality in community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review",
abstract = "Background. Several models have been developed to predict the risk of mortality in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aims to systematically identify and evaluate the performance of published risk prediction models for CAP. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library in November 2011 for initial derivation and validation studies for models which predict pneumonia mortality. We aimed to present the comparative usefulness of their mortality prediction. Results. We identified 20 different published risk prediction models for mortality in CAP. Four models relied on clinical variables that could be assessed in community settings, with the two validated models BTS1 and CRB-65 showing fairly similar balanced accuracy levels (0.77 and 0.72, resp.), while CRB-65 had AUROC of 0.78. Nine models required laboratory tests in addition to clinical variables, and the best performance levels amongst the validated models were those of CURB and CURB-65 (balanced accuracy 0.73 and 0.71, resp.), with CURB-65 having an AUROC of 0.79. The PSI (AUROC 0.82) was the only validated model with good discriminative ability among the four that relied on clinical, laboratorial, and radiological variables. Conclusions. There is no convincing evidence that other risk prediction models improve upon the well-established CURB-65 and PSI models.",
author = "Kwok, {Chun Shing} and Loke, {Yoon K} and Kenneth Woo and Myint, {Phyo Kyaw}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1155/2013/504136",
language = "English",
volume = "2013",
journal = "BioMed Research International",
issn = "2314-6133",
publisher = "Hindawi Publishing Corporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk prediction models for mortality in community-acquired pneumonia

T2 - a systematic review

AU - Kwok, Chun Shing

AU - Loke, Yoon K

AU - Woo, Kenneth

AU - Myint, Phyo Kyaw

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Background. Several models have been developed to predict the risk of mortality in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aims to systematically identify and evaluate the performance of published risk prediction models for CAP. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library in November 2011 for initial derivation and validation studies for models which predict pneumonia mortality. We aimed to present the comparative usefulness of their mortality prediction. Results. We identified 20 different published risk prediction models for mortality in CAP. Four models relied on clinical variables that could be assessed in community settings, with the two validated models BTS1 and CRB-65 showing fairly similar balanced accuracy levels (0.77 and 0.72, resp.), while CRB-65 had AUROC of 0.78. Nine models required laboratory tests in addition to clinical variables, and the best performance levels amongst the validated models were those of CURB and CURB-65 (balanced accuracy 0.73 and 0.71, resp.), with CURB-65 having an AUROC of 0.79. The PSI (AUROC 0.82) was the only validated model with good discriminative ability among the four that relied on clinical, laboratorial, and radiological variables. Conclusions. There is no convincing evidence that other risk prediction models improve upon the well-established CURB-65 and PSI models.

AB - Background. Several models have been developed to predict the risk of mortality in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aims to systematically identify and evaluate the performance of published risk prediction models for CAP. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library in November 2011 for initial derivation and validation studies for models which predict pneumonia mortality. We aimed to present the comparative usefulness of their mortality prediction. Results. We identified 20 different published risk prediction models for mortality in CAP. Four models relied on clinical variables that could be assessed in community settings, with the two validated models BTS1 and CRB-65 showing fairly similar balanced accuracy levels (0.77 and 0.72, resp.), while CRB-65 had AUROC of 0.78. Nine models required laboratory tests in addition to clinical variables, and the best performance levels amongst the validated models were those of CURB and CURB-65 (balanced accuracy 0.73 and 0.71, resp.), with CURB-65 having an AUROC of 0.79. The PSI (AUROC 0.82) was the only validated model with good discriminative ability among the four that relied on clinical, laboratorial, and radiological variables. Conclusions. There is no convincing evidence that other risk prediction models improve upon the well-established CURB-65 and PSI models.

U2 - 10.1155/2013/504136

DO - 10.1155/2013/504136

M3 - Article

VL - 2013

JO - BioMed Research International

JF - BioMed Research International

SN - 2314-6133

M1 - 504136

ER -