SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Lee JJW, Philteos J, Levin M, Namavarian A, Propst EJ, Wolter NE. JAMA Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2021; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, American Medical Association)

DOI

10.1001/jamaoto.2021.1548

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Although various clinical prediction models (CPMs) have been described for diagnosing pediatric foreign body aspiration (FBA), to our knowledge, there is still no consensus regarding indications for bronchoscopy, the criterion standard for identifying airway foreign bodies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate currently available CPMs for diagnosing FBA in children. DATA SOURCES: Performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL database with citation searching of retrieved studies. STUDY SELECTION: Prediction model derivation and validation studies for diagnosing FBA in children were included. Exclusion criteria included adult studies; studies that included variables that were not available in routine clinical practice and outcomes for FBA were not separate or extractable. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We followed the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modeling Studies and the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool framework. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the diagnosis of FBA as confirmed by bronchoscopy. Characteristics of CPMs and individual predictors were evaluated. The final model presentation with available measures of performance was provided by narrative synthesis. A meta-analysis of individual predictor variables and prediction models was performed.

RESULTS: After screening 4233 articles, 7 studies (0.2%; 1577 patients) were included in the final analysis. There were 6 model derivation studies and 1 validation study. Air trapping (odds ratio [OR], 8.3; 95% CI, 4.4-15.5), unilateral reduced air entry (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 3.5-6.5), witnessed choking (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.0-9.6), wheezing (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.2), and suspicious findings suggestive of FBA on radiography (OR, 18.5; 95% CI, 5.0-67.7) were the most commonly used predictor variables. Model performance varied, with discrimination scores (C statistic) ranging from 0.74 to 0.88. The pooled weighted C statistic score of all models was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80-0.92). All studies were deemed to be at high risk of bias, with overfitting of models and lack of validation as the most pertinent concerns.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that existing CPMs for FBA in children are at a high risk of bias and have not been adequately validated. No current models can be recommended to guide clinical decision-making. Future CPM studies that adhere to recognized standards for development and validation are required.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print