Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25792208›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine2015

A clinical prediction model to identify patients at high risk of death in the emergency department.

Michael Coslovsky, Jukka Takala, Aristomenis K Exadaktylos, Luca Martinolli, Tobias M Merz

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. The Ability of NEWS2 to Detect Sepsis in Adult Patients With Positive Blood Cultures.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Rapid Emergency Medicine Score as a Predictive Value for 30-day Outcome of Nonsurgical Patients Referred to the Emergency Department.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Prospective Validation of a Checklist to Predict Short-term Death in Older Patients After Emergency Department Admission in Australia and Ireland.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Michael CoslovskyClinical Trials Unit, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Jukka Takala
Aristomenis K Exadaktylos
Luca Martinolli
Tobias M Merz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRapid assessment and intervention is important for the prognosis of acutely ill patients admitted to the emergency department (ED). The aim of this study was to prospectively develop and validate a model predicting the risk of in-hospital death based on all available information available at the time of ED admission and to compare its discriminative performance with a non-systematic risk estimate by the triaging first health-care provider.

methodsProspective cohort analysis based on a multivariable logistic regression for the probability of death.

resultsA total of 8,607 consecutive admissions of 7,680 patients admitted to the ED of a tertiary care hospital were analysed. Most frequent APACHE II diagnostic categories at the time of admission were neurological (2,052, 24%), trauma (1,522, 18%), infection categories [1,328, 15%; including sepsis (357, 4.1%), severe sepsis (249, 2.9%), septic shock (27, 0.3%)], cardiovascular (1,022, 12%), gastrointestinal (848, 10%) and respiratory (449, 5%). The predictors of the final model were age, prolonged capillary refill time, blood pressure, mechanical ventilation, oxygen saturation index, Glasgow coma score and APACHE II diagnostic category. The model showed good discriminative ability, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.92 and good internal validity. The model performed significantly better than non-systematic triaging of the patient.

conclusionsThe use of the prediction model can facilitate the identification of ED patients with higher mortality risk. The model performs better than a non-systematic assessment and may facilitate more rapid identification and commencement of treatment of patients at risk of an unfavourable outcome.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCritical IllnessDecision Support TechniquesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRiskTriage

Identifiers

PMID25792208
PMCPMC4477719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.