Why the study?
Do methodological differences in surveillance and outcome definitions explain the deterioration of predictive indexes in validation studies?
Population
232 patients undergoing noncardiac surgery
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Methodological variations may explain inconsistent Goldman index performance; leaves open whether true deterioration occurs in validation studies.
Do methodological differences in surveillance and outcome definitions explain the deterioration of predictive indexes in validation studies?
Discrepancies in the performance of prognostic indexes in validation studies may arise from methodological differences in surveillance and outcome definitions rather than inevitable deterioration.
M. E. Charlson (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: