ArticleBMC pediatrics2019
Performance characteristics of a local triage tool and internationally validated tools among under-fives presenting to an urban emergency department in Tanzania.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of Pediatric Early Warning Score and physician gestalt in predicting adverse events among critically ill patients in an Emergency Department in Tanzania.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2026Article
- Manchester Triage System: Effectiveness, Limitations, and Global Implementation-A Structured Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparison between the Smart Triage model and the Emergency Triage Assessment and Treatment guidelines in triaging children presenting to the emergency departments of two public hospitals in Kenya.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Midwives' descriptions of avoidable causes of negative perinatal outcomes.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2023Article
- Effect of In-Situation Versus Manchester Triage System-Based Initial Case Management on Hospital-Based Mortality: A Before and After Study.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2022Article
- 'A tool we need': Midwives' descriptions and recommendations of an ideal obstetric triage tool.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2022Article
- The midwives' experiences of the use of obstetric triage and obstetric triage tool during labour in Bojanala district.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2022Article
- Epidemiology and treatment of sepsis at a public pediatric emergency department.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA number of region-specific validated triage systems exist; however very little is known about their performance in resource limited settings. We compare the local triage tool and internationally validated tools among under-fives presenting to an urban emergency department in Tanzania. METHODOLOGY: Prospective descriptive study of consecutive under-fives seen at Muhimbili National Hospital (MNH), ED between November 2017 to April 2018. Patients were triaged according to Local Triage System (LTS), and the information collected were used to assign acuities in the other triage scales: Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS), Australasian Triage Scale (ATS), Manchester Triage Scale (MTS) and South African Triage Scale (SATS). Patients were then followed up to determine disposition and 24 h outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for admission and mortality were then calculated.
resultsA total of 384 paediatric patients were enrolled, their median age was 17 months (IQR 7-36 months). Using LTS, 67(17.4%) patients were triaged in level one, 291(75.8%) level 2 and 26 (6.8%) in level 3 categories. Overall admission rate was 59.6% and at 24 h there were five deaths (1.3%). Using Level 1 in LTS, and Levels 1 and 2 in other systems, sensitivity and specificity for admission for all triage scales ranged between 27.1-28.4% and 95.4-98% respectively, (PPV 90.3-95.3%, NPV 47.1-47.4%). Sensitivity for mortality was 80% for LTS, and 100% for the other scales, while specificity was low, yielding a PPV for all scales between 6.9 and 8%.
conclusionAll triage scales showed poor ability to predict need for admission, however all triage scales except LTS predicted mortality. The test characteristics for the other scales were similar. Future studies should focus on determining the reliability and validity of each of these triage tools in our setting.
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.