Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Van Manen, J.G. et al.

Van Manen, Korevaar, Dekker, Boeschoten, Bossuyt, Krediet,

Adjustment for comorbidity in studies on health status in ESRD patients: which comorbidity index to use?

Health status can be an important outcome in studies on patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In these studies, adjustment for prognostic factors, such as comorbidity, often has to be made. None of the comorbidity indices that are commonly used in research on ESRD patients has been validated for studies on health status. This study evaluated three existing indices (Khan, Davies, and Charlson) and four indices specifically developed for use in studies on health status. In a large prospective multi-center study (NECOSAD-2), new ESRD patients were included (n = 1041). Comorbidity was assessed at the start of dialysis. Health status was assessed with the physical and mental component summary score of the SF-36 ( PCS and MCS), the symptoms dimension of the KDQOL-SF, and the Karnofsky Scale. Patient data were randomly allocated to a modeling or a testing set. The new indices were developed in the modeling set. The three existing indices explained about the same percentage of variance in the PCS (7 to 8%), MCS (1 to 3%), symptoms (2 to 4%), and Karnofsky (10 to 12%). The new indices performed better than the existing indices in the modeling population (13% PCS, 10% MCS, 10% symptoms, 18% Karnofsky), but not in the testing population (8% PCS, 1% MCS, 3% symptoms, 8% Karnofsky). Individual comorbidities explained more variance in PCS (10 to 15%), MCS (1 to 7%), symptoms (6 to 11%), and Karnofsky (11 to 18%) than comorbidity indices. The Khan, Davies, and the Charlson indices will adjust to the same extent for the potential confounding effect of comorbidity in studies with health status as an outcome. Separate comorbidity diagnoses will adjust best for comorbidity.[1]

References

Adjustment for comorbidity in studies on health status in ESRD patients: which comorbidity index to use? Van Manen, J.G., Korevaar, J.C., Dekker, F.W., Boeschoten, E.W., Bossuyt, P.M., Krediet, R.T. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. (2003) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.