4.6 Article

Externally validated model predicting gait independence after stroke showed fair performance and improved after updating

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 137, 期 -, 页码 73-82

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.022

关键词

External validation; Stroke; Prognostic model; Gait; Prediction; Model performance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study externally validated recent prognostic models that predict independent gait following stroke. The Australian model showed fair discrimination and good calibration, and further improvement was achieved by adding paretic leg strength.
Objective: To externally validate recent prognostic models that predict independent gait following stroke. Study Design and Setting: A systematic search identified recent models (< 10 years) that predicted independent gait in adult stroke patients, using easily obtainable predictors. Predictors from the original models were assigned proxies when required, and model performance was evaluated in the validation cohort (n = 957). Models were updated to determine if performance could be improved. Results: Three prognostic models met our criteria, all with high Risk of Bias. Validation data was only available for the Australian model. This model used National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and age to predict independent gait, using Motor Assessment Scale (MAS) walking item. For validation, Scandinavian Stroke Scale (SSS) was a proxy for NIHSS, and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) locomotion item was a proxy for MAS. The Area Under the Curve was 0.77 (0.74-0.80) and had good calibration in the validation dataset. Adjustment of the intercept and regression coefficients slightly improved discrimination. By adding paretic leg strength, the model further improved (AUC 0.82). Conclusion: External validation of the Australian model with proxies showed fair discrimination and good calibration. Updating the model by adding paretic leg strength further improved model performance. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据