↓ Skip to main content

Validity of the CR-POSSUM model in surgery for colorectal cancer in Spain (CCR-CARESS study) and comparison with other models to predict operative mortality

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validity of the CR-POSSUM model in surgery for colorectal cancer in Spain (CCR-CARESS study) and comparison with other models to predict operative mortality
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-2839-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marisa Baré, Manuel Jesús Alcantara, Maria José Gil, Pablo Collera, Marina Pont, Antonio Escobar, Cristina Sarasqueta, Maximino Redondo, Eduardo Briones, Paula Dujovne, Jose Maria Quintana, on behalf of the CARESS-CCR Study Group

Abstract

To validate and recalibrate the CR- POSSUM model and compared its discriminatory capacity with other European models such as POSSUM, P-POSSUM, AFC or IRCS to predict operative mortality in surgery for colorectal cancer. Prospective multicenter cohort study from 22 hospitals in Spain. We included patients undergoing planned or urgent surgery for primary invasive colorectal cancers between June 2010 and December 2012 (N = 2749). Clinical data were gathered through medical chart review. We validated and recalibrated the predictive models using logistic regression techniques. To calculate the discriminatory power of each model, we estimated the areas under the curve - AUC (95% CI). We also assessed the calibration of the models by applying the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. In-hospital mortality was 1.5% and 30-day mortality, 1.7%. In the validation process, the discriminatory power of the CR-POSSUM for predicting in-hospital mortality was 73.6%. However, in the recalibration process, the AUCs improved slightly: the CR-POSSUM reached 75.5% (95% CI: 67.3-83.7). The discriminatory power of the CR-POSSUM for predicting 30-day mortality was 74.2% (95% CI: 67.1-81.2) after recalibration; among the other models the POSSUM had the greatest discriminatory power, with an AUC of 77.0% (95% CI: 68.9-85.2). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed good fit for all the recalibrated models. The CR-POSSUM and the other models showed moderate capacity to discriminate the risk of operative mortality in our context, where the actual operative mortality is low. Nevertheless the IRCS might better predict in-hospital mortality, with fewer variables, while the CR-POSSUM could be slightly better for predicting 30-day mortality. Registered at: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02488161.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 9 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 50%
Psychology 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 11 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 09 November 2019.
All research outputs
#2,547,860
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,054
of 7,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,166
of 444,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#38
of 175 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 444,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 175 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.