WeChat Mini Program
Old Version Features

A Comparative Study of the Predictive Value of Four Models for Death in Patients with Severe Burns.

BURNS(2024)

17 Yongwai Zhengjie

Cited 1|Views13
Abstract
Objective: To assess the prognostic value of the Ryan score, Belgian Outcome of Burn Injury (BOBI) score,revised Baux (rBaux) score, and a new model (a Logit(P)-based scoring method created in 2020) for predicting mortality risk in patients with extremely severe burns and to conduct a comparative analysis. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 599 burn patients who met the inclusion criteria and were admitted to the burn unit of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from 2017 to 2022. Relevant information was collected, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were plotted for each of the four models in assessing mortality in these burn patients using both age-stratified and unstratified forms. The ROC curve section was further compared with the area under the curve (AUC), optimal cutoff value, as well as its sensitivity and specificity. Additionally, the quality of the AUC was assessed using the Delong test. Result: Among the patients who met the inclusion criteria, 532 were in the survival group and 67 in the death group. Irrespective of age stratification, the novel model exhibited superior performance with an AUC of 0.868 (95% CI: 0.838-0.894) among all four models predicting mortality risk in included patients, and also demonstrated better AUC quality than other models; the calibration curves showed that the accuracy of all four models was good; the DCA curves showed that the clinical utility of the novel model and rBuax score were better. In the comparison of four scoring models across different age groups, the new model demonstrated the largest AUC in both 0-19 years (0.954, 95% CI 0.914-0.979) and 20-59 years groups (0.838, 95% CI 0.793-0.877), while rBuax score exhibited the highest AUC in >= 60 years group (0.708, 95% CI of 0.602-0.800). The calibration curves showed that the four models exhibited greater accuracy within the age range of 20-59 years, while the DCA curves indicated that both the novel model and rBuax score scale displayed better prediction in both the 20-59 and >= 60 years groups. Conclusions: All four models demonstrate accurate and effective prognostication for patients with severe burns. Both the novel model and rBaux score exhibit enhanced prediction utility. In terms of the model itself alone, the new model is not simpler than, for example, the rBaux score, and whether it can be applied clinicallyinvolves further study. (c) 2023 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.
More
Translated text
Key words
Burn,Scoring method,Prognosis,Statistical model,Bayesian prediction,Age groups
求助PDF
上传PDF
Bibtex
AI Read Science
AI Summary
AI Summary is the key point extracted automatically understanding the full text of the paper, including the background, methods, results, conclusions, icons and other key content, so that you can get the outline of the paper at a glance.
Example
Background
Key content
Introduction
Methods
Results
Related work
Fund
Key content
  • Pretraining has recently greatly promoted the development of natural language processing (NLP)
  • We show that M6 outperforms the baselines in multimodal downstream tasks, and the large M6 with 10 parameters can reach a better performance
  • We propose a method called M6 that is able to process information of multiple modalities and perform both single-modal and cross-modal understanding and generation
  • The model is scaled to large model with 10 billion parameters with sophisticated deployment, and the 10 -parameter M6-large is the largest pretrained model in Chinese
  • Experimental results show that our proposed M6 outperforms the baseline in a number of downstream tasks concerning both single modality and multiple modalities We will continue the pretraining of extremely large models by increasing data to explore the limit of its performance
Upload PDF to Generate Summary
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Data Disclaimer
The page data are from open Internet sources, cooperative publishers and automatic analysis results through AI technology. We do not make any commitments and guarantees for the validity, accuracy, correctness, reliability, completeness and timeliness of the page data. If you have any questions, please contact us by email: report@aminer.cn
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined