2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.08.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating the development and validation of empirically-derived prognostic models for pressure ulcer risk assessment: A systematic review

Abstract: Background: Researchers advocate developing empirically-derived prognostic models to predict pressure ulcer risk. However, there remains a scarcity of evidence about the performance and clinical value of these models. Objectives: To identify and describe empirically-derived models for predicting pressure ulcer risk; to assess the predictive performance of these models; and to evaluate their clinical impact in reducing pressure ulcer incidence. Methods: We performed a comprehensive database search up to Februar… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
38
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
1
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our findings are in line with the Theoretical Framework for Acceptability (Sekhon, Cartwright, & Francis, ), which defines acceptability as a multifaceted construct reflecting the extent to which those delivering or receiving an intervention deem it as appropriate based on their anticipated and experienced acceptability. The collaborative approach we took during the development of the bundle is likely to have assisted with the levels of acceptability as we were able to identify the most appropriate procedures to implement research into clinical practice (Buckley, Grant, & Glazener, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Our findings are in line with the Theoretical Framework for Acceptability (Sekhon, Cartwright, & Francis, ), which defines acceptability as a multifaceted construct reflecting the extent to which those delivering or receiving an intervention deem it as appropriate based on their anticipated and experienced acceptability. The collaborative approach we took during the development of the bundle is likely to have assisted with the levels of acceptability as we were able to identify the most appropriate procedures to implement research into clinical practice (Buckley, Grant, & Glazener, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Even though the data sets were often imbalanced, Setoguchi et al [51] suggested that an alternating DT algorithm could effectively analyze highly imbalanced data. Shi et al [57] identified 22 empirically derived predictive models for PI risk using traditional statistical techniques. Compared with the previous predictive models, these advanced models can use the information available in EHRs rather than require investigators to input information into a questionnaire, and they can handle a large volume of various data at a faster velocity.…”
Section: Component 1: Predictive Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Once nonblanchable erythema is identified, people are probably at higher risk of developing new pressure ulcers, and appropriate preventive measures should be provided in time to deter the progression towards a more severe pressure ulcer . As well as being of clinical importance, the findings from this review highlight that nonblanchable erythema should be considered an important prognostic factor in future prognostic models for pressure ulcer prediction . However, this evidence is based on clinical studies with high degrees of standardization.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…59 As well as being of clinical importance, the findings from this review highlight that nonblanchable erythema should be considered an important prognostic factor in future prognostic models for pressure ulcer prediction. 60 However, this evidence is based on clinical studies with high degrees of standardization. Correctly identifying nonblanchable erythema in clinical practice is still a major challenge, with low reliability as numerous studies suggest.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%