Abstract:A considerable number of risk models, which predict outcomes in mortality and readmission rates, have been developed for patients with acute heart failure (AHF) to help stratify patients by risk level, improve decision making, and save medical resources. However, some models exist in a clinically useful manner such as risk scores or online calculators, while others are not, providing only limited information that prevents clinicians and patients from using them. The reported performance of some models varied greatly when predicting at multiple time points and being validated in different cohorts, which causes model users uncertainty about the predictive accuracy of these models. The foregoing leads to users facing difficulties in the selection of prediction models, and even sometimes being reluctant to utilize models. Therefore, a systematic review to assess the performance at multiple time points, applicability, and clinical impact of extant prediction models for mortality and readmission in AHF patients is essential. It may facilitate the selection of models for clinical implementation. Four databases will be searched from their inception onwards. Multivariable prognostic models for mortality and/or readmission in AHF patients will be eligible for review. Characteristics and the clinical impact of included models will be summarized qualitatively and quantitatively, and models with clinical utility will be compared with those without. Predictive performance measures of included models with an analogous clinical outcome appraised repeatedly, will be compared and synthesized by a meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of validation studies for a common prediction model at the same time point will also be performed. We will also provide an overview of critical appraisal of the risk of bias, applicability, and reporting transparency of included studies using the PROBAST tool and TRIPOD statement. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021256416.

A Bayesian Selection Model for Correcting Outcome Reporting Bias With Application to a Meta-analysis on Heart Failure Interventions

Addressing Outcome Reporting Bias in Meta-analysis: A Selection Model Perspective

A Bayesian "Fill-In" Method for Correcting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis.

A robust Bayesian bias-adjusted random effects model for consideration of uncertainty about bias terms in evidence synthesis

A Bayesian Bias-Adjusted Random-Effects Model for Synthesizing Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials and Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions.

Meta‐Analysis of Studies with Missing Data

Robust Point and Variance Estimation for Meta‐analyses with Selective Reporting and Dependent Effect Sizes

Objective Bayesian meta-analysis based on generalized multivariate random effects model

Risk prediction models for mortality and readmission in patients with acute heart failure: A protocol for systematic review, critical appraisal, and meta-analysis

Bayesian meta-analysis for evaluating treatment effectiveness in biomarker subgroups using trials of mixed patient populations

Bayesian meta‐analysis for evaluating treatment effectiveness in biomarker subgroups using trials of mixed patient populations

Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs for Chronic Heart Disease: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

Quantitative bias analysis for outcome phenotype error correction in comparative effect estimation: an empirical and synthetic evaluation

Bayesian Model-Averaged Meta-Analysis in Medicine

A Bayesian Approach to Correct for Unmeasured or Semi-Unmeasured Confounding in Survival Data Using Multiple Validation Data Sets

Comparative effectiveness of ehealth self-management interventions for patients with heart failure: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

Integrating randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies of interventions to assess the effect of rare events: a Bayesian re-analysis of two meta-analyses

A Quick and Accurate Method for the Estimation of Covariate Effects Based on Empirical Bayes Estimates in Mixed-Effects Modeling: Correction of Bias Due to Shrinkage.

Robust Bayesian meta-analysis: Addressing publication bias with model-averaging.

An improved multiply robust estimator for the average treatment effect

A framework for understanding selection bias in real-world healthcare data