Observational studyPloS one2020
Scores for sepsis detection and risk stratification - construction of a novel score using a statistical approach and validation of RETTS.
Observational study in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Validation and comparison of triage-based screening strategies for sepsis.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Age in addition to RETTS triage priority substantially improves 3-day mortality prediction in emergency department patients: a multi-center cohort study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Observational
- Sepsis Prediction Model for Determining Sepsis vs SIRS, qSOFA, and SOFA.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- The accuracy of the National Early Warning Score 2 in predicting early death in prehospital and emergency department settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of NEWS2 response thresholds in a retrospective observational study from a UK acute hospital.BMJ open · 2022Observational
- Performance of NEWS2, RETTS, clinical judgment and the Predict Sepsis screening tools with respect to identification of sepsis among ambulance patients with suspected infection: a prospective cohort study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Reverse Engineering of the Pediatric Sepsis Regulatory Network and Identification of Master Regulators.Biomedicines · 2021Article
- Pre-hospital triage performance and emergency medical services nurse's field assessment in an unselected patient population attended to by the emergency medical services: a prospective observational study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2020Observational
- Validation of National Early Warning Score for predicting 30-day mortality after rapid response system activation in Japan.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo allow early identification of patients at risk of sepsis in the emergency department (ED), a variety of risk stratification scores and/or triage systems are used. The first aim of this study was to develop a risk stratification score for sepsis based upon vital signs and biomarkers using a statistical approach. Second, we aimed to validate the Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System (RETTS) for sepsis. RETTS combines vital signs with symptoms for risk stratification.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed data from two prospective, observational, multicentre cohorts of patients from studies of biomarkers in ED. A candidate risk stratification score called Sepsis Heparin-binding protein-based Early Warning Score (SHEWS) was constructed using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selector Operator (LASSO) method. SHEWS and RETTS were compared to National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) for infection-related organ dysfunction, intensive care or death within the first 72h after admission (i.e. sepsis).
results506 patients with a diagnosed infection constituted cohort A, in which SHEWS was derived and RETTS was validated. 435 patients constituted cohort B of whom 184 had a diagnosed infection where both scores were validated. In both cohorts (A and B), AUC for infection-related organ dysfunction, intensive care or death was higher for NEWS2, 0.80 (95% CI 0.76-0.84) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.63-0.74), than RETTS, 0.74 (95% CI 0.70-0.79) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.49-0.60), p = 0.05 and p <0.01, respectively. SHEWS had the highest AUC, 0.73 (95% CI 0.68-0.79) p = 0.32 in cohort B.
conclusionsEven with a statistical approach, we could not construct better risk stratification scores for sepsis than NEWS2. RETTS was inferior to NEWS2 for screening for sepsis.
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.