Completed Prognosis Worksheet for Evidence-Based Neonatal Medicine
Citation
Aziz K., Vickar D.B., Sauve R.S., et al. Province-Based Study of Neurologic Disability of Children Weighing 500 Through 1249 Grams at Birth in Relation to Neonatal Cerebral Ultrasound Findings. Pediatrics 1995; 95(6): 837-44.
Are the results of this prognosis study valid?
-
Was a defined, representative sample of patients assembled at a common (usually early) point in the course of their disease?
Yes. A provincial cohort of preterm infants with birth weights between 500 gm and 1249 gm who survived beyond one year of age was prospectively evaluated. -
Was patient follow-up sufficiently long and complete?
Yes. 97% of the infants who survived beyond one year (646 out of 669) were assessed at 2-3 years of age. -
Were objective outcome criteria applied in a "blind" fashion?
It is not clearly stated that follow-up assessments were performed without knowledge of the neonatal ultrasound findings! -
If subgroups with different prognoses are identified, was there adjustment for important prognostic factors?
No subgroups with different prognoses were identified. -
Was there validation in an independent group ("test-set") of patients?
No.
Are the valid results of this prognosis study important?
-
How likely are the outcomes over time?
Serial assessments are not reported; however, a diagnosis of disability at 2-3 years of age is unlikely to change much in later childhood. -
How precise are the prognostic estimates?
24 of 50 children with transient or permanent unilateral or bilateral cerebral ventriculomegaly were disabled: 48% (95% CI: 34-62%).
If you want to calculate a Confidence Interval around the measure of Prognosis
| Clinical Measure | Standard Error (SE) | Typical calculation of CI |
|---|---|---|
|
Proportion (as in the rate of some prognostic event, etc) where: the number of patients = n the proportion of these patients who experience the event = p |
![]() where p is proportion and n is number of patients |
For pCV or tCV: If p = 24/50 = 0.48 (or 48%) and n=50 ![]() 95% CI is 48% ± 1.96 x 7.1% or 34.1% to 61.9% |
Can you apply this valid, important evidence about a diagnostic test in caring for your patient?
-
Were the study patients similar to your own?
Yes. -
Will this evidence make a clinically important impact on your conclusions about what to offer or tell your patient?
Yes.
Additional Notes
-



