ArticleAfrican journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence2019
Are "virtual" paediatric weight estimation studies valid?
Article in African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating Lean Body Weight in Adults With the PAWPER XL-MAC Tape Using Actual Measured Weight as an Input Variable.Cureus · 2022Article
- Comparison of adult weight estimation methods for use during emergency medical care.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2021Article
- Validation of two pediatric resuscitation tapes.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020Article
- Using the Mercy Method to Estimate Ideal Body Weight in Children: A Description and Validation of a New Methodology.Cureus · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction"Virtual" studies account for nearly one-third of all published weight estimation articles, but the validity of these virtual studies has never been evaluated. It is important to establish this validity in order to decide whether the results of these studies can be applied to real-world usage. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the accuracy of virtual weight estimates using the Broselow and PAWPER tapes and compare these to actual real-life estimates from the tapes.
methodsVirtual weights were generated for the Broselow and PAWPER tapes using anthropometric data from a sample of 1385 children for whom actual Broselow and PAWPER tape weights were available. The accuracy of the virtual and real-life estimates was compared against each child's actual weight. The agreement of the virtual and real estimates was also evaluated.
resultsThe percentage of weight estimates within 10% of actual weight were 57.9% and 59.3% for the real and virtual Broselow tapes respectively and 76.6% and 78.4% for the real and virtual PAWPER tapes respectively. The Cohen's kappa for the real and virtual Broselow and PAWPER tapes was 0.65 and 0.64 respectively, which indicated substantial agreement.
conclusionsThe virtual and real weight estimates had very similar accuracy outcomes for both tapes in this study. However, if virtual studies are used, they should be followed by real-life studies in order to assess the impact of human and patient factor errors on the accuracy of the weight estimation systems.
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.