ArticleThe Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS2020
Validity and Reliability of Emergency Severity Index and Conventional Three-Tier Triage System in the Emergency Department, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Article in The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review of Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage tool's utility in predicting mortality and critical care unit admission in Emergency Departments.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the existing three-tier triaging system and a new five-level emergency triaging system, emergency severity index (ESI), in the Emergency Department (ED) of Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM).
methodsThis study was conducted in HUSM's ED over two study periods. In the first three months, 300 patients were triaged under the three-tier triaging system, and, in the subsequent three months, 280 patients were triaged under the ESI. The patients were triaged by junior paramedics and the triage records were retained and later re-triaged by senior paramedics. The inter-rater reliability was evaluated using Cohen's Kappa statistics. The acuity ratings of the junior paramedics were compared with those of the expert panel to determine the sensitivity and specificity of each acuity level for both the ESI and the three-tier triaging system. The over-triage rate, under-triage rate, amount of resources used, admission rate and discharge rate were also determined.
resultsThe inter-rater agreement for the three-tier triaging system was 0.81 while that of the ESI was 0.75. The ESI had a higher average sensitivity of 74.3% and a specificity of 94.4% while the three-tier system's average sensitivity was 68.5% and its specificity 87.0%. The average under-triage and over-triage rates for the ESI were 10.7% and 6.2%, respectively, which were lower than the three-tier system's average under-triage rate of 13.1% and over-triage rate of 17.1%. The urgency levels of both the ESI and the three-tier system were associated with increased admission rates and resources used in the ED.
conclusionThe ESI's inter-rater reliability was comparable to the three-tier triaging system and it demonstrated better validity than the existing three-tier system.
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.