Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29777740›Full record

ReviewResuscitation2018

Rapid response systems.

Patrick G Lyons, Dana P Edelson, Matthew M Churpek

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Resuscitation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Prevalence, treatment, and outcomes of sepsis during rapid response team calls: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Patrick G LyonsDepartment of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States.
Dana P EdelsonDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Matthew M ChurpekDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. Electronic address: matthew.churpek@uchospitals.edu.

Funding

PRINCIPLES IN PULMONARY RESEARCHT32HL007317 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Steven Brody, Michael J Holtzman · 1985 to 2026
$16.1M
Sepsis Early Prediction and Subphenotype Illumination Study (SEPSIS)R01GM123193 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CHURPEK, MATTHEW MICHAEL · 2017 to 2021
$1.9M
Predicting In-hospital Cardiac Arrest Using Electronic Health Record DataK08HL121080 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI CHURPEK, MATTHEW MICHAEL · 2014 to 2018
$751k
NHLBI NIH HHS K08 HL121080NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007317NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM123193
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRapid response systems are commonly employed by hospitals to identify and respond to deteriorating patients outside of the intensive care unit. Controversy exists about the benefits of rapid response systems.

aimsWe aimed to review the current state of the rapid response literature, including evolving aspects of afferent (risk detection) and efferent (intervention) arms, outcome measurement, process improvement, and implementation. DATA SOURCES: Articles written in English and published in PubMed.

resultsRapid response systems are heterogeneous, with important differences among afferent and efferent arms. Clinically meaningful outcomes may include unexpected mortality, in-hospital cardiac arrest, length of stay, cost, and processes of care at end of life. Both positive and negative interventional studies have been published, although the two largest randomized trials involving rapid response systems - the Medical Early Response and Intervention Trial (MERIT) and the Effect of a Pediatric Early Warning System on All-Cause Mortality in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients (EPOCH) trial - did not find a mortality benefit with these systems, albeit with important limitations. Advances in monitoring technologies, risk assessment strategies, and behavioral ergonomics may offer opportunities for improvement.

conclusionsRapid responses may improve some meaningful outcomes, although these findings remain controversial. These systems may also improve care for patients at the end of life. Rapid response systems are expected to continue evolving with novel developments in monitoring technologies, risk prediction informatics, and work in human factors.

Indexed as

Clinical DeteriorationHospital MortalityHeart ArrestHospital Rapid Response TeamHumansOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareRisk AssessmentMedical emergency teamsRapid response systemsRapid response teams

Identifiers

PMID29777740
PMCPMC6147149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.