↓ Skip to main content

External validation of a biomarker and clinical prediction model for hospital mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
External validation of a biomarker and clinical prediction model for hospital mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00134-017-4854-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhiguo Zhao, Nancy Wickersham, Kirsten N. Kangelaris, Addison K. May, Gordon R. Bernard, Michael A. Matthay, Carolyn S. Calfee, Tatsuki Koyama, Lorraine B. Ware

Abstract

Mortality prediction in ARDS is important for prognostication and risk stratification. However, no prediction models have been independently validated. A combination of two biomarkers with age and APACHE III was superior in predicting mortality in the NHLBI ARDSNet ALVEOLI trial. We validated this prediction tool in two clinical trials and an observational cohort. The validation cohorts included 849 patients from the NHLBI ARDSNet Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT), 144 patients from a clinical trial of sivelestat for ARDS (STRIVE), and 545 ARDS patients from the VALID observational cohort study. To evaluate the performance of the prediction model, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), model discrimination, and calibration were assessed, and recalibration methods were applied. The biomarker/clinical prediction model performed well in all cohorts. Performance was better in the clinical trials with an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.70-0.79) in FACTT, compared to 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.77) in VALID, a more heterogeneous observational cohort. The AUC was 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.76) when FACTT and VALID were combined. We validated a mortality prediction model for ARDS that includes age, APACHE III, surfactant protein D, and interleukin-8 in a variety of clinical settings. Although the model performance as measured by AUC was lower than in the original model derivation cohort, the biomarker/clinical model still performed well and may be useful for risk assessment for clinical trial enrollment, an issue of increasing importance as ARDS mortality declines, and better methods are needed for selection of the most severely ill patients for inclusion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 20%
Other 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 21 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,001,266
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#2,780
of 5,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,616
of 318,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#69
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,105 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,296 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.