Clinical Risk Prediction Scores in Coronavirus Disease 2019: Beware of Low Validity and Clinical Utility

9Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Several risk stratification tools were developed to predict disease progression in coronavirus disease 2019, with no external validation to date. We attempted to validate three previously published risk-stratification tools in a multicenter study. Primary outcome was a composite outcome of development of severe coronavirus disease 2019 disease leading to ICU admission or death censored at hospital discharge or 30 days. We collected data from 169 patients. Patients were 73 years old (59-82 yr old), 66 of 169 (39.1%) were female, 57 (33.7%) had one comorbidity, and 80 (47.3%) had two or more comorbidities. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) for the COVID-GRAM score was 0.636 (0.550-0.722), for the CALL score 0.500 (0.411-0.589), and for the nomogram 0.628 (0.543-0.714).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Al Hassan, H., Cocks, E., Jesani, L., Lewis, S., & Szakmany, T. (2020). Clinical Risk Prediction Scores in Coronavirus Disease 2019: Beware of Low Validity and Clinical Utility. Critical Care Explorations, 2(10), E0253. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000253

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free