Key result
A systematic review of multivariable prognosis models for CKD found that only 21% reported full model equations, which showed great variability in performance upon external validation (n=788).
Why the study?
Accurate risk prediction is needed for personalized healthcare in CKD patients, but published prognosis studies are numerous and need systematic appraisal of quality and external validation.
Are published multivariable prognostic models for CKD patients of sufficient quality and valid for predicting ESRD, cardiovascular events, and mortality?
Systematic Review (n=788)
Are published multivariable prognostic models for CKD patients of sufficient quality and valid for predicting ESRD, cardiovascular events, and mortality?
Despite an abundance of published prognostic models for CKD, most are of moderate quality and lack full equations, severely limiting their direct clinical utility and reproducibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Most CKD prognostic models cannot be readily implemented or validated; challenges assumptions of clinical readiness and underscores need for standardized reporting.
Rijn et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review in chronic kidney disease (n=788). Multivariable prognosis models was evaluated on Prognosis of ESRD, cardiovascular events, and mortality. A systematic review of multivariable prognosis models for CKD found that only 21% reported full model equations, which showed great variability in performance upon external validation (n=788).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: