Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32434791›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2020

Early warning scores for detecting deterioration in adult hospital patients: systematic review and critical appraisal of methodology.

Stephen Gerry, Timothy Bonnici, Jacqueline Birks, Shona Kirtley, Pradeep S Virdee, Peter J Watkinson, Gary S Collins

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07577349 (Performance of Different Early Warning Systems in Predicting 28-day Mortality Among Geriatric Emergency Department Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 178 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
178citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–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.

NCT07577349 completednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Performance of Different Early Warning Systems in Predicting 28-day Mortality Among Geriatric Emergency Department Patients

TypeobservationalSponsorHaseki Training and Research HospitalRan2025 to 2026Enrolled2,744ConditionsMortality, Clinical Deterioration, Geriatric Patients, FrailtyArmsDemographic Characteristics, Comorbidities, Vital Signs, Laboratory Parameters, Severity Scores
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

178 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Implementing early warning systems for sepsis recognition in African healthcare settings: an Angolan perspective.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

118 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Stephen GerryCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK stephen.gerry@csm.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4654-7311
Timothy BonniciCritical Care Division, University College London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Jacqueline BirksCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Shona KirtleyCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Pradeep S VirdeeCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Peter J WatkinsonNuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Gary S CollinsCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16895Cancer Research UK 27294Department of Health DRF-2016-09-073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide an overview and critical appraisal of early warning scores for adult hospital patients.

designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Embase until June 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Studies describing the development or external validation of an early warning score for adult hospital inpatients.

results13 171 references were screened and 95 articles were included in the review. 11 studies were development only, 23 were development and external validation, and 61 were external validation only. Most early warning scores were developed for use in the United States (n=13/34, 38%) and the United Kingdom (n=10/34, 29%). Death was the most frequent prediction outcome for development studies (n=10/23, 44%) and validation studies (n=66/84, 79%), with different time horizons (the most frequent was 24 hours). The most common predictors were respiratory rate (n=30/34, 88%), heart rate (n=28/34, 83%), oxygen saturation, temperature, and systolic blood pressure (all n=24/34, 71%). Age (n=13/34, 38%) and sex (n=3/34, 9%) were less frequently included. Key details of the analysis populations were often not reported in development studies (n=12/29, 41%) or validation studies (n=33/84, 39%). Small sample sizes and insufficient numbers of event patients were common in model development and external validation studies. Missing data were often discarded, with just one study using multiple imputation. Only nine of the early warning scores that were developed were presented in sufficient detail to allow individualised risk prediction. Internal validation was carried out in 19 studies, but recommended approaches such as bootstrapping or cross validation were rarely used (n=4/19, 22%). Model performance was frequently assessed using discrimination (development n=18/22, 82%; validation n=69/84, 82%), while calibration was seldom assessed (validation n=13/84, 15%). All included studies were rated at high risk of bias.

conclusionsEarly warning scores are widely used prediction models that are often mandated in daily clinical practice to identify early clinical deterioration in hospital patients. However, many early warning scores in clinical use were found to have methodological weaknesses. Early warning scores might not perform as well as expected and therefore they could have a detrimental effect on patient care. Future work should focus on following recommended approaches for developing and evaluating early warning scores, and investigating the impact and safety of using these scores in clinical practice. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017053324.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBlood PressureClinical DeteriorationCritical CareDeathEarly Warning ScoreFemaleHeart ArrestHeart RateHospitalsHumansInpatientsMaleMiddle AgedOxyhemoglobinsOxyhemoglobins

Identifiers

PMID32434791
PMCPMC7238890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.