Risk factor-targeted abdominal aortic aneurysm screening: systematic review of risk prediction for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

IF 8.6 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY British Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1093/bjs/znae239
Liam Musto,Aiden Smith,Coral Pepper,Sylwia Bujkiewicz,Matthew Bown
{"title":"Risk factor-targeted abdominal aortic aneurysm screening: systematic review of risk prediction for abdominal aortic aneurysm.","authors":"Liam Musto,Aiden Smith,Coral Pepper,Sylwia Bujkiewicz,Matthew Bown","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znae239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nThis systematic review aimed to investigate the current state of risk prediction for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the literature, identifying and comparing published models and describing their performance and applicability to a population-based targeted screening strategy.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nElectronic databases MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), MedRxiv, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for papers reporting or validating risk prediction models for abdominal aortic aneurysm. Studies were included only if they were developed on a cohort or study group derived from the general population and used multiple variables with at least one modifiable risk factor. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool. A synthesis and comparison of the identified models was undertaken.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThe search identified 4813 articles. After full-text review, 37 prediction models were identified, of which 4 were unique predictive models that were reported in full. Applicability was poor when considering targeted screening strategies using electronic health record-based populations. Common risk factors used for the predictive models were explored across all 37 models; the most common risk factors in predictive models for abdominal aortic aneurysm were: age, sex, biometrics (such as height, weight, or BMI), smoking, hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, and history of heart disease. Few models had undergone standardized model development, adequate external validation, or impact evaluation.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nThis study identified four risk models that can be replicated and used to predict abdominal aortic aneurysm with acceptable levels of discrimination. None of the models have been validated externally.","PeriodicalId":136,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Surgery","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae239","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND This systematic review aimed to investigate the current state of risk prediction for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the literature, identifying and comparing published models and describing their performance and applicability to a population-based targeted screening strategy. METHODS Electronic databases MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), MedRxiv, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for papers reporting or validating risk prediction models for abdominal aortic aneurysm. Studies were included only if they were developed on a cohort or study group derived from the general population and used multiple variables with at least one modifiable risk factor. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool. A synthesis and comparison of the identified models was undertaken. RESULTS The search identified 4813 articles. After full-text review, 37 prediction models were identified, of which 4 were unique predictive models that were reported in full. Applicability was poor when considering targeted screening strategies using electronic health record-based populations. Common risk factors used for the predictive models were explored across all 37 models; the most common risk factors in predictive models for abdominal aortic aneurysm were: age, sex, biometrics (such as height, weight, or BMI), smoking, hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, and history of heart disease. Few models had undergone standardized model development, adequate external validation, or impact evaluation. CONCLUSION This study identified four risk models that can be replicated and used to predict abdominal aortic aneurysm with acceptable levels of discrimination. None of the models have been validated externally.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以风险因素为目标的腹主动脉瘤筛查:腹主动脉瘤风险预测系统综述。
背景本系统性综述旨在调查文献中腹主动脉瘤风险预测的现状,识别和比较已发表的模型,并描述其性能和对基于人群的定向筛查策略的适用性。方法检索电子数据库 MEDLINE(通过 Ovid)、Embase(通过 Ovid)、MedRxiv、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Library 中报告或验证腹主动脉瘤风险预测模型的论文。纳入的研究必须是以来自普通人群的队列或研究小组为基础开发的,并使用了至少一个可改变风险因素的多个变量。使用预测模型偏倚风险评估工具(Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool)对偏倚风险进行评估。结果搜索共发现 4813 篇文章。全文审阅后,确定了 37 个预测模型,其中 4 个是完整报告的独特预测模型。在考虑使用基于电子健康记录的人群进行有针对性的筛查策略时,适用性较差。对所有 37 个模型中用于预测模型的常见风险因素进行了探讨;腹主动脉瘤预测模型中最常见的风险因素是:年龄、性别、生物统计学(如身高、体重或体重指数)、吸烟、高血压、高胆固醇血症和心脏病史。本研究发现了四种可用于预测腹主动脉瘤的风险模型,这些模型可被复制并具有可接受的辨别水平。这些模型均未经外部验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1102
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Surgery (BJS), incorporating the European Journal of Surgery, stands as Europe's leading peer-reviewed surgical journal. It serves as an invaluable platform for presenting high-quality clinical and laboratory-based research across a wide range of surgical topics. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of traditional surgical practices, BJS also showcases emerging areas in the field, such as minimally invasive therapy and interventional radiology. While the journal appeals to general surgeons, it also holds relevance for specialty surgeons and professionals working in closely related fields. By presenting cutting-edge research and advancements, BJS aims to revolutionize the way surgical knowledge is shared and contribute to the ongoing progress of the surgical community.
期刊最新文献
Assessing diversity among consultant paediatric surgeons in the UK: open science, education, and academic achievement. Surgeon factors and their association with operating room turnover time. Chest wall perforator flaps are safe and can decrease mastectomy rates in breast cancer surgery: multicentre cohort study. Infrapyloric and gastroepiploic lymph node metastasis in right transverse colon cancer (InCLART study): multicentre, prospective, observational study. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy in anorectal melanoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1