ArticleCritical care (London, England)2016
External validation of a prehospital risk score for critical illness.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Internal Validation of a Multivariable Prehospital Prediction Score for Critical Illness Progression and 30-Day Mortality in Non-Traumatic EMS Patients.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2026Article
- Association of the Revised Trauma Score with Mortality and Prehospital LSI Among Trauma and Non-Trauma Patients.Prehospital emergency care · 2025Observational
- Development and internal validation of an algorithm for estimating mortality in patients encountered by physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical services.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024Observational
- Transparent reporting of multivariable prediction models developed or validated using clustered data (TRIPOD-Cluster): explanation and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Article
- Resources and Geographic Access to Care for Severe Pediatric Pneumonia in Four Resource-limited Settings.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2022Article
- A pre-hospital risk score predicts critical illness in non-trauma patients transported by ambulance to a Dutch tertiary referral hospital.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Institution-Specific Machine Learning Models for Prehospital Assessment to Predict Hospital Admission: Prediction Model Development Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Prehospital identification of community sepsis using biomarkers of host response.Intensive care medicine · 2020Article
- Analysis of the early warning score to detect critical or high-risk patients in the prehospital setting.Internal and emergency medicine · 2019Observational
- A Multicenter Observational Prospective Cohort Study of Association of the Prehospital National Early Warning Score 2 and Hospital Triage with Early Mortality.Emergency medicine international · 2019Article
- Association Between Intravenous Fluid Bolus and Biomarker Trajectory During Prehospital Care.Prehospital emergency careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIdentification of critically ill patients during prehospital care could facilitate early treatment and aid in the regionalization of critical care. Tools to consistently identify those in the field with or at higher risk of developing critical illness do not exist. We sought to validate a prehospital critical illness risk score that uses objective clinical variables in a contemporary cohort of geographically and temporally distinct prehospital encounters.
methodsWe linked prehospital encounters at 21 emergency medical services (EMS) agencies to inpatient electronic health records at nine hospitals in southwestern Pennsylvania from 2010 to 2012. The primary outcome was critical illness during hospitalization, defined as an intensive care unit stay with delivery of organ support (mechanical ventilation or vasopressor use). We calculated the prehospital risk score using demographics and first vital signs from eligible EMS encounters, and we tested the association between score variables and critical illness using multivariable logistic regression. Discrimination was assessed using the AUROC curve, and calibration was determined by plotting observed versus expected events across score values. Operating characteristics were calculated at score thresholds.
resultsAmong 42,550 nontrauma, non-cardiac arrest adult EMS patients, 1926 (4.5 %) developed critical illness during hospitalization. We observed moderate discrimination of the prehospital critical illness risk score (AUROC 0.73, 95 % CI 0.72-0.74) and adequate calibration based on observed versus expected plots. At a score threshold of 2, sensitivity was 0.63 (95 % CI 0.61-0.75), specificity was 0.73 (95 % CI 0.72-0.73), negative predictive value was 0.98 (95 % CI 0.98-0.98), and positive predictive value was 0.10 (95 % CI 0.09-0.10). The risk score performance was greater with alternative definitions of critical illness, including in-hospital mortality (AUROC 0.77, 95 % CI 0.7 -0.78).
conclusionsIn an external validation cohort, a prehospital risk score using objective clinical data had moderate discrimination for critical illness during hospitalization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.