Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Clinical prediction models for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a systematic review update
  1. Archie Parekh1,
  2. Samarth Satish1,
  3. Louise Dulhanty2,
  4. Carlo Berzuini3,
  5. Hiren Patel4
  1. 1The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  2. 2Salford Royal Hospital Manchester Centre for Clinical Neurosciences, Salford, UK
  3. 3Centre for Biostatistics, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  4. 4Greater Manchester Neurosciences Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Hiren Patel, Greater Manchester Neurosciences Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, Salford, UK; Hiren.Patel{at}srft.nhs.uk

Abstract

Background A systematic review of clinical prediction models for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) reported in 2011 noted that clinical prediction models for aSAH were developed using poor methods and were not externally validated. This study aimed to update the above review to guide the future development of predictive models in aSAH.

Methods We systematically searched Embase and MEDLINE databases (January 2010 to February 2022) for articles that reported the development of a clinical prediction model to predict functional outcomes in aSAH. Our reviews are based on the items included in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) checklist, and on data abstracted from each study in accord with the Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) 2014 checklist. Bias and applicability were assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST).

Results We reviewed data on 30 466 patients contributing to 29 prediction models abstracted from 22 studies identified from an initial search of 7858 studies. Most models were developed using logistic regression (n=20) or machine learning (n=9) with prognostic variables selected through a range of methods. Age (n=13), World Federation of Neurological Surgeons (WFNS) grade (n=11), hypertension (n=6), aneurysm size (n=5), Fisher grade (n=12), Hunt and Hess score (n=5), and Glasgow Coma Scale (n=8) were the variables most frequently included in the reported models. External validation was performed in only four studies. All but one model had a high or unclear risk of bias due to poor performance or lack of validation.

Conclusion Externally validated models for the prediction of functional outcome in aSAH patients have now become available. However, most of them still have a high risk of bias.

  • aneurysm
  • subarachnoid
  • hemorrhage

Data availability statement

Data sharing not applicable as no datasets generated and/or analysed for this study.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data sharing not applicable as no datasets generated and/or analysed for this study.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @archie_dparekh

  • Contributors AP and SS: conception and design of the study, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data, drafting the manuscript, and final approval of the version to be submitted. CB: contributed to the design of the study, acquisition of data, critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be submitted. LD: contributed to the design of the study, acquisition of data, critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be submitted. HP: substantial contributions to the analysis and interpretation of data, critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be submitted. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. Each author believes that the manuscript represents honest work and is willing to take public responsibility for it. Additionally, each author has made substantial contributions to the intellectual content and meets the criteria for authorship established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). HC will act as guarantor for the study.

  • Funding HP and LD are funded by the National Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme Ref: 14/209/07.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.