A critical appraisal of the clinical applicability and risk of bias of the predictive models for mortality and recurrence in patients with oropharyngeal cancer: Systematic review

The use of predictive models is becoming widespread. However, these models should be developed appropriately (CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modeling Studies [CHARMS] and Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool [PROBAST] statements). C...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Head & neck 2020-04, Vol.42 (4), p.763-773
Main Authors: Palazón‐Bru, Antonio, Mares‐García, Emma, López‐Bru, David, Mares‐Arambul, Enrique, Folgado‐de la Rosa, David M., Carbonell‐Torregrosa, María de los Ángeles, Gil‐Guillén, Vicente F.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
death
Head and neck
Humans
Mortality
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Oropharyngeal cancer
oropharyngeal neoplasms
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - therapy
Prediction models
recurrence
Research Design
Statistical analysis
statistical models
Systematic review
Systematic Reviews as Topic
Throat cancer
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The use of predictive models is becoming widespread. However, these models should be developed appropriately (CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modeling Studies [CHARMS] and Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool [PROBAST] statements). Concerning mortality/recurrence in oropharyngeal cancer, we are not aware of any systematic reviews of the predictive models. We carried out a systematic review of the MEDLINE/EMBASE databases of those predictive models. In these models, we analyzed the 11 domains of the CHARMS statement and the risk of bias and applicability, using the PROBAST tool. Six papers were finally included in the systematic review and all of them presented high risk of bias and several limitations in the statistical analysis. The applicability was satisfactory in five out of six studies. None of the models could be considered ready for use in clinical practice.
ISSN:1043-3074
1097-0347
DOI:10.1002/hed.26025