Purpose: Early clinical recognition of sepsis can be challenging. With the advancement of machine learning, promising real-time models to predict sepsis have emerged. We assessed their performance by carrying out a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase.com and Scopus. Studies targeting sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock in any hospital setting were eligible for inclusion. The index test was any supervised machine learning model for real-time prediction of these conditions. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, with a tailored Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist to evaluate risk of bias. Models with a reported area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) metric were meta-analyzed to identify strongest contributors to model performance. Results: After screening, a total of 28 papers were eligible for synthesis, from which 130 models were extracted. The majority of papers were developed in the intensive care unit (ICU, n = 15; 54%), followed by hospital wards (n = 7; 25%), the emergency department (ED, n = 4; 14%) and all of these settings (n = 2; 7%). For the prediction of sepsis, diagnostic test accuracy assessed by the AUROC ranged from 0.68-0.99 in the ICU, to 0.96-0.98 in-hospital and 0.87 to 0.97 in the ED. Varying sepsis definitions limit pooling of the performance across studies. Only three papers clinically implemented models with mixed results. In the multivariate analysis, temperature, lab values, and model type contributed most to model performance. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis show that on retrospective data, individual machine learning models can accurately predict sepsis onset ahead of time. Although they present alternatives to traditional scoring systems, between-study heterogeneity limits the assessment of pooled results. Systematic reporting and clinical implementation studies are needed to bridge the gap between bytes and bedside.

The Dutch-Flemish PROMIS Physical Function item bank exhibited good psychometric properties. Development of a computer adaptive test based on the large bank is warranted.

No abstract

This study applies ordinal confirmatory factor analysis for multiple groups to assess equivalence of scale, random errors and systematic (nonrandom) errors of attitudinal questions surveyed on rating scales under different survey modes (Face-to-Face [F2F], Telephone, Paper, and Web). Empirical findings from a large-scale experiment are presented. Consistent with theoretical expectations, interviewer-and self-administered surveys measured all assessed questions on systematically different scales, with different systematic bias, and with differing extents of random error. These measurement effects were absent when comparing Paper with Web or F2F with Telephone. It is concluded that modes impact primarily systematic measurement effects affecting multiple items equally. Interviewer-and self-administered modes should only be combined with great care in mixed-mode surveys that focus on attitudinal constructs. Combining Paper and Web or Telephone and F2F are the viable options. Thereby choosing the self-administered modes appears more

ObjectivesThe Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a universally applicable set of instruments, including item banks, short forms and computer adaptive tests (CATs), measuring patient-reported health across different patient populations. PROMIS CATs are highly efficient and the use in practice is considered feasible with little administration time, offering standardized and routine patient monitoring. Before an item bank can be used as CAT, the psychometric properties of the item bank have to be examined. Therefore, the objective was to assess the psychometric properties of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS Physical Function item bank (DF-PROMIS-PF) in Dutch patients receiving physical therapy.DesignCross-sectional study.Setting and participants805 patients >18 years, who received any kind of physical therapy in primary care in the past year, completed the full DF-PROMIS-PF (121 items).MethodsUnidimensionality was examined by Confirmatory Factor Analysis and local dependence and monotonicity were evaluated. A Graded Response Model was fitted. Construct validity was examined with correlations between DF-PROMIS-PF T-scores and scores on two legacy instruments (SF-36 Health Survey Physical Functioning scale [SF36-PF10] and the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability-Index [HAQ-DI]). Reliability (standard errors of theta) was assessed.ResultsThe results for unidimensionality were mixed (scaled CFI = 0.924, TLI = 0.923, RMSEA = 0.045, 1th factor explained 61.5% of variance). Some local dependence was found (8.2% of item pairs). The item bank showed a broad coverage of the physical function construct (threshold-parameters range: -4.28–2.33) and good construct validity (correlation with SF36-PF10 = 0.84 and HAQ-DI = -0.85). Furthermore, the DF-PROMIS-PF showed greater reliability over a broader score-range than the SF36-PF10 and HAQ-DI.ConclusionsThe psychometric properties of the DF-PROMIS-PF item bank are sufficient. The DF-PROMIS-PF can now be used as short forms or CAT to measure the level of physical function of physiotherapy patients.

IMPORTANCE Understanding mechanisms associated with prolonged cognitive health in combination with exceptional longevity might lead to approaches to enable successful aging. OBJECTIVE To investigate trajectories of cognitive functioning in centenarians across domains, and to examine the association of these trajectories with factors underlying cognitive reserve, physical health, and postmortem levels of Alzheimer disease (AD)-associated neuropathology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study used neuropsychological test data and postmortem neuropathological reports from Dutch centenarians who were drawn from the 100-plus Study between January 2013 and April 2019. Eligible participants self-reported being cognitively healthy, which was confirmed by a proxy. Data analysis was performed between June 2019 and June 2020. EXPOSURES Age, sex, APOE ε genotype, factors of cognitive reserve, physical health, and AD-associated neuropathology (ie, amyloid-β, neurofibrillary tangles, and neuritic plaques). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESIn annual visits (until death or until participation was no longer possible), centenarians underwent an extensive neuropsychological test battery, from which an mean z score of global cognition, memory, executive functions, verbal fluency, visuospatial functions, and attention/processing speed was calculated. Linear mixed models with a random intercept and time as independent variable were used to investigate cognitive trajectories, adjusted for sex, age, education, and vision and hearing capacities. In a second step, linear mixed models were used to associate cognitive trajectories with factors underlying cognitive reserve, physical health at baseline, and AD-associated neuropathology. RESULTSOf the 1023 centenarians approached, 340 were included in the study. We analyzed 330 centenarians for whom cognitive tests were available at baseline (239 [72.4%] women; median [interquartile range] age of 100.5 [100.2-101.7] years), with a mean (SD) follow-up duration of 1.6 (0.8) years. We observed no decline across investigated cognitive domains, with the exception of a slight decline in memory function (β, −0.10 SD per year; 95% CI, −0.14 to −0.05 SD; P < .001).

Summary This study compares the extent of selection error (non‐response and coverage error) evoked by the four major contemporary modes of data collection (face to face, telephone, mail and Web) and three sequential mixed mode designs (telephone, mail and Web with face‐to‐face follow‐up) for the case of the Dutch Crime Victimization Survey. Sociodemographic characteristics and target variables from the survey serve as benchmark variables. A special two‐wave experimental design allows studying design differences in selection error on Crime Victimization Survey variables independently from differences in measurement error. Despite large differences in response rates, only small or no differences in selection error between the four single‐mode designs are found on both types of variable. We observe cases when the error is enlarged or mitigated in the mixed mode designs despite the fact that the designs yielded large response increases. Our results question the use of response rates to motivate the choice of mode and use of mixed mode surveys.

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the joints affecting 1% of the world population. It has major impact on patients through disability and associated comorbidities. Current treatment strategies have considerably improved the prognosis, but recent innovations (especially biologic drugs and the new class of so-called “JAK/STAT inhibitors”) have important safety issues and are very costly. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are highly effective in RA, and could reduce the need for expensive treatment with biologic agents. However, despite more than 65 years of clinical experience, there is a lack of studies large enough to adequately document the benefit/harm balance. The result is inappropriate treatment strategies, i.e. both under-use and over-use of GCs, and consequently suboptimal treatment of RA.MethodsThe GLORIA study is a pragmatic multicentre, 2-year, randomised, double-blind, clinical trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of a daily dose of 5 mg prednisolone or matching placebo added to standard of care in elderly patients with RA. Eligible participants are diagnosed with RA, have inadequate disease control (disease activity score, DAS28 ≥ 2.6), and are ≥ 65 years. The primary outcome measures are the time-averaged mean value of the DAS28 and the occurrence of serious adverse events or adverse events of special interest. During the trial, change in antirheumatic therapy is permitted as clinically indicated, except for GCs. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility are secondary outcomes. The main challenge is the interpretation of the trial result with two primary endpoints and the pragmatic trial design that allows co-interventions. Another challenge is the definition of safety and the relative lack of power to detect differences between treatment groups. We have chosen to define safety as the number of patients experiencing at least one serious adverse event. We also specify a decision tree to guide our conclusion on the balance of benefit and harm, and our methodology to combat potential confounding caused by co-interventions.DiscussionPragmatic trials minimise impact on daily practice and maximise clinical relevance of the results, but analysis and interpretation of the results is challenging. We expect that the results of this trial are of importance for all rheumatologists who treat elderly patients with RA.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02585258. Registered on 20 October 2015.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2396-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.