ArticleWorld journal of emergency medicine2020
Presenting patterns of dermatology conditions to an Australian emergency department.
Article in World journal of emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dermatological emergencies and determinants of hospitalization in Switzerland: A retrospective study.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025Observational
- From Rash Decisions to Critical Conditions: A Systematic Review of Dermatological Presentations in Emergency Departments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Epidemiological Trends and Characteristics of Dermatological Conditions Presenting to a Saudi Major Emergency Department.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2024Article
- Cytokine/Chemokine assessment as a complementary diagnostic tool for inflammatory skin diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Paediatric dermatological conditions in an emergency department: a single-centre study in Thailand.BMJ paediatrics open · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApproximately 5%-8% of emergency department (ED) presentations are due to a dermatological condition. This study aimed to identify and characterise patients with skin conditions presenting to a busy ED.
methodsA 5-year retrospective study on patients with dermatological conditions presenting to the Princess Alexandra Hospital ED in Brisbane, Australia was performed. Electronic medical records were used to compare demographics and admission status of the dermatology group and the total ED group presentations. A prospective survey was conducted on low priority triage (triage 4 and 5) patients identifying reasons presenting to the ED.
resultsOf a total 281,718 ED presentations, 11,748 dermatology presentations were identified between January 2012 to December 2016. Of the dermatology presentations, 41.5% were female and had an average age of 47. The most common dermatology presentations were cellulitis, abscess, rash unspecified, and ulcer. Of those admitted, 36% were female, average age was 53, mean length of stay of 294 minutes and 83.1% had an infectious aetiology. Of triage 4 and 5 presentations, 66% patients we approached had been seen by a health practitioner prior to coming to the ED.
conclusionWithin the population presenting with a skin related condition to the Princess Alexandra Hospital ED, characteristics associated with admission include male sex, older age, and an infectious etiology. This data may help ED clinicians decide on the discharge disposition of these patients. There may be a role for streamlined admissions for skin related infections, or improved hospital in the home services to support this group.
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.