Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31172095›Full record

ArticleAdvanced journal of emergency medicine2018

Outcome-Based Validity and Reliability Assessment of Raters Regarding the Admission Triage Level in the Emergency Department: a Cross-Sectional Study.

Seyedhossein Seyedhosseini-Davarani, Amir Nejati, Hooman Hossein-Nejad, Seyed-Mohammad Mousavi, Mojtaba Sedaghat, Mona Arbab, Shahram Bagheri-Hariri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced journal of emergency medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Seyedhossein Seyedhosseini-DavaraniDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Imam Khomeini Complex Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amir NejatiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Imam Khomeini Complex Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Hooman Hossein-NejadDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Imam Khomeini Complex Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seyed-Mohammad MousaviDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Imam Khomeini Complex Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mojtaba SedaghatDepartment of Community Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mona ArbabResearch Postdoc Fellow, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Shahram Bagheri-HaririDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Imam Khomeini Complex Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEmergency department (ED) is usually the first line of healthcare supply to patients in non-urgent to critical situations and, if necessary, provides hospital admission. A dynamic system to evaluate patients and allocate priorities is necessary. Such a structure that facilitates patients' flow in the ED is termed triage.

objectiveThis study was conducted to investigate the validity and reliability of implementation of Emergency Severity Index (ESI) system version 4 by triage nurses in an overcrowded referral hospital with more than 80000 patient admissions per year and an average emergency department occupancy rate of more than 80%.

methodThis prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital and trauma center with an emergency medicine residency program. Seven participating expert nurses were asked to assess the ESI level of patients in 30 written scenarios twice within a three-week interval to evaluate the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability. Patients were randomly selected to participate in the study, and the triage level assigned by the nurses was compared with that by the emergency physicians. Finally, based on the patients' charts, an expert panel evaluated the validity of the triage level.

resultsDuring the study period, 527 patients with mean age of 54 ± 7 years, including 253 (48%) women and 274 (52%) men, were assessed by seven trained triage nurses. The degree of retrograde agreement between the collaborated expert panel's evaluation and the actual triage scales by the nurses and physicians for all 5 levels was excellent, with the Cohen's weighted kappa being 0.966 (CI 0.985-0.946, p < 0.001) and 0.813 (CI 0.856-0.769, p<0.001), respectively. The intra-rater reliability was 0.94 (p < 0.0001), and the inter-rater reliability for all the nurses was in perfect agreement with the test result (Cohen's weighted kappa were as follows: 0.919, 0.956, 0.911, 0.955, 0.860, 0.956, and 0.868; p < 0.001).

conclusionThe study findings showed that there was perfect reliability and, overall, almost perfect validity for the triage performed by the studied nurses.

Indexed as

Emergency departmentPatient outcome assessmentReliability and validityTriage

Identifiers

PMID31172095
PMCPMC6549196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.