ArticlePLoS currents2016
Qualitative Analysis of Surveyed Emergency Responders and the Identified Factors That Affect First Stage of Primary Triage Decision-Making of Mass Casualty Incidents.
Article in PLoS currents, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- When do caregivers ignore the veil of ignorance? An empirical study on medical triage decision-making.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2021Article
- Triage.Critical care clinics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAfter all large-scale disasters multiple papers are published describing the shortcomings of the triage methods utilized. This paper uses medical provider input to help describe attributes and patient characteristics that impact triage decisions.
methodsA survey distributed electronically to medical providers with and without disaster experience. Questions asked included what disaster experiences they had, and to rank six attributes in order of importance regarding triage.
results403 unique completed surveys were analyzed. 92% practiced a structural triage approach with the rest reporting they used "gestalt".(gut feeling) Twelve per cent were identified as having placed patients in an expectant category during triage. Respiratory status, ability to speak, perfusion/pulse were all ranked in the top three. Gut feeling regardless of statistical analysis was fourth. Supplies were ranked in the top four when analyzed for those who had placed patients in the expectant category.
conclusionPrimary triage decisions in a mass casualty scenario are multifactorial and encompass patient mobility, life saving interventions, situational instincts, and logistics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27651979PMC5016230W2511677064What 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.