Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group.

Open access
O'Connor, G T, Plume, S K, Olmstead, E M, Coffin, L H, Morton, J R, Maloney, C T, Nowicki, E R, Levy, D G, Tryzelaar, J F, Hernandez, F·1992·Circulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A prospective regional study was conducted to identify factors associated with in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). A prediction rule was developed and validated based on the data collected. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 3,055 patients were collected from five clinical centers between July 1, 1987, and April 15, 1989. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict the risk of in-hospital mortality. A prediction rule was developed on a training set of data and validated on an independent test set. The metric used to assess the performance of the prediction rule was the area under the relative operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Variables used to construct the regression model of in-hospital mortality included age, sex, body surface area, presence of comorbid disease, history of CABG, left ventricular end-diastolic pressure, ejection fraction score, and priority of surgery. The model significantly predicted the occurrence of in-hospital mortality. The area under the ROC curve obtained from the training set of data was 0.74 (perfect, 1.0). The prediction rule performed well when used on a test set of data (area, 0.76). The correlation between observed and expected numbers of deaths was 0.99. CONCLUSIONS: The prediction rule described in this report was developed using regional data, uses only eight variables, has good performance characteristics, and is easily available to clinicians with access to a microcomputer or programmable calculator. This validated multivariate prediction rule would be useful both to calculate the risk of mortality for an individual patient and to contrast observed and expected mortality rates for an institution or a particular clinician.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.85.6.2110

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
O'Connor, G. T., Plume, S. K., Olmstead, E. M., Coffin, L. H., Morton, J. R., Maloney, C. T., Nowicki, E. R., Levy, D. G., Tryzelaar, J. F., & Hernandez, F.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1992-06
Volume
85
Issue
6
Pages
2110-2118
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2063507658
Cited by
406
References
19
FWCI
13.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.85.6.2110
The paper
O'Connor, G. T., Plume, S. K., Olmstead, E. M., Coffin, L. H., Morton, J. R., Maloney, C. T., Nowicki, E. R., Levy, D. G., Tryzelaar, J. F., & Hernandez, F. (1992). Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.85.6.2110

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.