Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 757

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development and Validation of a Risk Calculator for Prediction of Cardiac Risk After Surgery

Gupta, Prateek K., Gupta, Himani, Sundaram, Abhishek, Kaushik, Manu, Fang, Xiang, Miller, Weldon J., Esterbrooks, Dennis J., Hunter, Claire B., Pipinos, Iraklis I., Johanning, Jason M., Lynch, Thomas G., Forse, R. Armour, Mohiuddin, Syed M., Mooss, Aryan N.·2011·Circulation

Abstract

Background—: Perioperative myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The Revised Cardiac Risk Index is currently the most commonly used cardiac risk stratification tool; however, it has several limitations, one of which is its relatively low discriminative ability. The objective of the present study was to develop and validate a predictive cardiac risk calculator. Methods and Results—: Patients who underwent surgery were identified from the American College of Surgeons' 2007 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, a multicenter (>250 hospitals) prospective database. Of the 211 410 patients, 1371 (0.65%) developed perioperative myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, 5 predictors of perioperative myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest were identified: type of surgery, dependent functional status, abnormal creatinine, American Society of Anesthesiologists' class, and increasing age. The risk model based on the 2007 data set was subsequently validated on the 2008 data set (n=257 385). The model performance was very similar between the 2007 and 2008 data sets, with C statistics (also known as area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of 0.884 and 0.874, respectively. Application of the Revised Cardiac Risk Index to the 2008 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set yielded a relatively lower C statistic (0.747). The risk model was used to develop an interactive risk calculator. Conclusions—: The cardiac risk calculator provides a risk estimate of perioperative myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest and is anticipated to simplify the informed consent process. Its predictive performance surpasses that of the Revised Cardiac Risk Index.

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/circulationaha.110.015701

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 757

Metadata

Authors
Gupta, P. K., Gupta, H., Sundaram, A., Kaushik, M., Fang, X., Miller, W. J., Esterbrooks, D. J., Hunter, C. B., Pipinos, I. I., Johanning, J. M., Lynch, T. G., Forse, R. A., Mohiuddin, S. M., & Mooss, A. N.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2011-07-26
Volume
124
Issue
4
Pages
381-387
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2153291863
Cited by
757
References
1
FWCI
18.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Development and Validation of a Risk Calculator for Prediction of Cardiac Risk After Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.110.015701
The paper
Gupta, P. K., Gupta, H., Sundaram, A., Kaushik, M., Fang, X., Miller, W. J., Esterbrooks, D. J., Hunter, C. B., Pipinos, I. I., Johanning, J. M., Lynch, T. G., Forse, R. A., Mohiuddin, S. M., & Mooss, A. N. (2011). Development and Validation of a Risk Calculator for Prediction of Cardiac Risk After Surgery. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.110.015701

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.