Prediction Models for Prognosis of Cervical Cancer: Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal

被引:9
|
作者
He, Bingjie [1 ]
Chen, Weiye [1 ]
Liu, Lili [1 ]
Hou, Zheng [2 ]
Zhu, Haiyan [3 ]
Cheng, Haozhe [3 ]
Zhang, Yixi [3 ]
Zhan, Siyan [1 ]
Wang, Shengfeng [1 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Peking Univ Third Hosp, Dept Obster & Gynecol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Peking Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Hlth Sci Ctr, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
cervical cancer; prediction model; predictors; risk of bias; statistical analysis; RISK; NOMOGRAM; CARCINOMA; TOOL; APPLICABILITY; VALIDATION; RECURRENCE; SURVIVAL; PROBAST; BIAS;
D O I
10.3389/fpubh.2021.654454
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Objective: This work aims to systematically identify, describe, and appraise all prognostic models for cervical cancer and provide a reference for clinical practice and future research. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases up to December 2020 and included studies developing, validating, or updating a prognostic model for cervical cancer. Two reviewers extracted information based on the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modeling Studies checklist and assessed the risk of bias using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool. Results: Fifty-six eligible articles were identified, describing the development of 77 prognostic models and 27 external validation efforts. The 77 prognostic models focused on three types of cervical cancer patients at different stages, i.e., patients with early-stage cervical cancer (n = 29; 38%), patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (n = 27; 35%), and all-stage cervical cancer patients (n = 21; 27%). Among the 77 models, the most frequently used predictors were lymph node status (n = 57; 74%), the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage (n = 42; 55%), histological types (n = 38; 49%), and tumor size (n = 37; 48%). The number of models that applied internal validation, presented a full equation, and assessed model calibration was 52 (68%), 16 (21%), and 45 (58%), respectively. Twenty-four models were externally validated, among which three were validated twice. None of the models were assessed with an overall low risk of bias. The Prediction Model of Failure in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer model was externally validated twice, with acceptable performance, and seemed to be the most reliable. Conclusions: Methodological details including internal validation, sample size, and handling of missing data need to be emphasized on, and external validation is needed to facilitate the application and generalization of models for cervical cancer.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Prediction Models for Osteoporotic Fractures Risk: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal
    Sun, Xuemei
    Chen, Yancong
    Gao, Yinyan
    Zhang, Zixuan
    Qin, Lang
    Song, Jinlu
    Wang, Huan
    Wu, Irene X. Y.
    AGING AND DISEASE, 2022, 13 (04): : 1215 - 1238
  • [22] Multivariable prediction models of caries increment: a systematic review and critical appraisal
    Kristian Havsed
    Gunnel Hänsel Petersson
    Per-Erik Isberg
    Maria Pigg
    Gunnel Svensäter
    Madeleine Rohlin
    Systematic Reviews, 12
  • [23] Prediction models for depression risk among older adults: systematic review and critical appraisal
    Tan, Jie
    Ma, Chenxinan
    Zhu, Chonglin
    Wang, Yin
    Li, Han
    Li, Jiarun
    He, Yanxuan
    Wu, Chenkai
    AGEING RESEARCH REVIEWS, 2023, 83
  • [24] Prediction Models for Intraoperative Acquired Pressure Injury of Adults: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal
    Xu, Yihong
    Zhao, Han
    Wu, Shuang
    Wang, Jianan
    Zhou, Jinyan
    Ding, Shanni
    Li, Wen
    Wu, Wenjin
    Yang, Zhichao
    Xu, Hongxia
    Pan, Hongying
    ADVANCES IN WOUND CARE, 2025,
  • [25] Machine Learning-based Prediction Models for Diagnosis and Prognosis in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review
    Nguyen, Nghia H.
    Picetti, Dominic
    Dulai, Parambir S.
    Jairath, Vipul
    Sandborn, William J.
    Ohno-Machado, Lucila
    Chen, Peter L.
    Singh, Siddharth
    JOURNAL OF CROHNS & COLITIS, 2022, 16 (03) : 398 - 413
  • [26] Prediction models of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: A systematic review
    Deng, Bo
    Li, Yan
    Chen, Jia-Yin
    Guo, Jun
    Tan, Jing
    Yang, Yang
    Liu, Ning
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2022, 135
  • [27] Prediction Models for Return of Spontaneous Circulation in Patients with Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal
    Cheng, Pengfei
    Yang, Pengyu
    Zhang, Hua
    Wang, Haizhen
    EMERGENCY MEDICINE INTERNATIONAL, 2023, 2023
  • [28] Prediction Models for Postoperative Pneumonia in Elderly Hip Fracture Patients: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal
    He, Zhiqiang
    Zhong, Gaoting
    Han, Wenjin
    Han, Mengyu
    Wu, Wenbin
    Zhou, Xiaoling
    Yang, Yaru
    An, Yu
    Li, Jin
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2025, 34 (05) : 1613 - 1628
  • [29] Systematic Review of Prognosis Models in Predicting Tooth Loss in Periodontitis
    Chow, D. Y.
    Tay, J. R. H.
    Nascimento, G. G.
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2024, 103 (06) : 596 - 604
  • [30] FINDRISC in Latin America: a systematic review of diagnosis and prognosis models
    Carrillo-Larco, Rodrigo M.
    Aparcana-Granda, Diego J.
    Mejia, Jhonatan R.
    Bernabe-Ortiz, Antonio
    BMJ OPEN DIABETES RESEARCH & CARE, 2020, 8 (01)