ArticlePaediatrics & child health2019
Use of a standardized asthma severity score to determine emergency department disposition for paediatric asthma: A cohort study.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fractured Neck of Femur Clinical Pathway Use in Tasmanian Emergency Departments: A Retrospective Study.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2025Article
- The Use of Clinical Pathways in Emergency Departments: A Scoping Review.Health services insights · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe recently introduced a clinical practice pathway for the management of asthma that uses the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) to guide emergency department (ED) treatment and disposition. The pathway recommends discharge for patients who achieve improvement to PRAM <4 at 1 hour after the last bronchodilator. We evaluated practice variation and patient outcomes associated with PRAM-directed disposition recommendations.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of children aged 2 to 17 years treated for moderate asthma (PRAM score 4-7) using our asthma clinical pathway. We measured 1) the proportion of children discharged per pathway criteria who returned to our ED within 24 hours and 2) the proportion of children observed beyond the pathway discharge criteria who deteriorated (PRAM ≥4).
resultsWe analyzed 385 patient records from September 2013 to February 2015. Among 145 (37.7%) patients discharged per pathway criteria, 4 (4/145; 2.8%) returned within 24 hours. The remaining 240 (62.2%) were observed beyond the pathway discharge criteria; 76/240 (31.7%) had a subsequent deterioration (PRAM score ≥ 4) and 25/240 (10.4%) were hospitalized. Of those who deteriorated, 46/76 (60.5%) worsened within the first additional hour of observation.
conclusionWe observed significant deviation from our PRAM-directed pathway discharge criteria and that a significant proportion of observed patients experienced clinical deterioration beyond the first hour of observation. We recommend observing children with moderate asthma for 2 or 3 hours from last bronchodilator therapy if PRAM < 4 is maintained, to capture the majority (97.7% or 99.7%) of patients who require further intervention and hospitalization.
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.