Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28122537›Full record

SynthesisBMC pediatrics2017

Reliability and validity of pediatric triage tools evaluated in Low resource settings: a systematic review.

Bhakti Hansoti, Alexander Jenson, Devin Keefe, Sarah Stewart De Ramirez, Trisha Anest, Michelle Twomey, Katie Lobner, Gabor Kelen, Lee Wallis

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pediatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Triage systems in low-resource emergency care settings.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Outcomes of Chengdu Pediatric Emergency Triage Criteria: A Retrospective Study of 198,628 Pediatric Patient Records.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Bhakti HansotiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1830 Monument St Suite 6-100, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. Bhansot1@jhmi.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-0188-9764
Alexander JensonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1830 Monument St Suite 6-100, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Devin KeefeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1830 Monument St Suite 6-100, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Sarah Stewart De RamirezDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1830 Monument St Suite 6-100, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Trisha AnestDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1830 Monument St Suite 6-100, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Michelle TwomeyUniversity of Cape Town Division of Emergency Medicine, Private Bag X24, Bellville, 7535, South Africa.
Katie LobnerWelch Medical Library, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
Gabor KelenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1830 Monument St Suite 6-100, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Lee WallisUniversity of Cape Town Division of Emergency Medicine, Private Bag X24, Bellville, 7535, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the high burden of pediatric mortality from preventable conditions in low and middle income countries and the existence of multiple tools to prioritize critically ill children in low-resource settings, no analysis exists of the reliability and validity of these tools in identifying critically ill children in these scenarios.

methodsThe authors performed a systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature published, for studies pertaining to for triage and IMCI in low and middle-income countries in English language, from January 01, 2000 to October 22, 2013. An updated literature search was performed on on July 1, 2015. The databases searched included the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed and Web of Science. Only studies that presented data on the reliability and validity evaluations of triage tool were included in this review. Two independent reviewers utilized a data abstraction tool to collect data on demographics, triage tool components and the reliability and validity data and summary findings for each triage tool assessed.

resultsOf the 4,717 studies searched, seven studies evaluating triage tools and 10 studies evaluating IMCI were included. There were wide varieties in method for assessing reliability and validity, with different settings, outcome metrics and statistical methods.

conclusionsStudies evaluating triage tools for pediatric patients in low and middle income countries are scarce. Furthermore the methodology utilized in the conduct of these studies varies greatly and does not allow for the comparison of tools across study sites.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessDeveloping CountriesChildHumansReproducibility of ResultsTriage

Identifiers

PMID28122537
PMCPMC5267450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.