ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2020
Predicting outcome for ambulance patients with dyspnea: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Guidelines for the Initial Assessment of Respiratory Distress in the Emergency Department.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Final diagnoses and mortality rates in ambulance patients administered nebulized β2-agonists bronchodilators.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- TeLePhone Respiratory (TeLePoR) score to assess the risk of immediate respiratory support through phone call for acute dyspnoea: a prospective cohort study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Advancing a machine learning-based decision support tool for pre-hospital assessment of dyspnoea by emergency medical service clinicians: a retrospective observational study.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Existing Data Sources in Clinical Epidemiology: The Danish Prehospital Medical Record System.Clinical epidemiology · 2025Review
- Characteristics of low acuity prehospital emergency patients with 48-h mortality, an observational cohort study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2022Observational
- How Patients Who Are Transported by Ambulance Experience Dyspnea and the Use of a Dyspnea Scale: A Qualitative Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Predicting outcome for ambulance patients with dyspnea: a prospective cohort study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo validate the discrimination and classification accuracy of a novel acute dyspnea scale for identifying outcomes of out-of-hospital patients with acute dyspnea.
methodsProspective observational population-based study in the North Denmark Region. We included patients from July 1, 2017 to September 24, 2019 assessed as having acute dyspnea by the emergency dispatcher or by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel. Patients rated dyspnea using the 11-point acute dyspnea scale. The primary outcomes were hospitalization >2 days, ICU admission within 48 hours of ambulance run, and 30-day mortality. We used 5-fold cross-validation and area under receiver operating curves (AUC) to assess predictive properties of the acute dyspnea scale score alone and combined with vital data, age, and sex.
resultsWe included 3144 EMS patients with reported dyspnea. Median acute dyspnea scale score was 7 (interquartile range 5 to 8). The outcomes were: 1966 (63%) hospitalized, 164 (5%) ICU stay, and 224 (9%) died within 30 days of calling the ambulance. The acute dyspnea scale score alone showed poor discrimination for hospitalization (AUC 0.56, 95% confidence intervals: 0.54-0.58), intensive care unit admission (0.58, 0.53-0.62), and mortality (0.46, 0.41-0.50). Vital signs (respiratory rate, blood oxygen saturation, blood pressure, and heart rate) showed similarly poor discrimination for all outcomes. The combination of [vital signs + acute dyspnea scale score] showed better discrimination for hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality (AUC 0.71-0.72). Patients not able to report an acute dyspnea scale score worse outcomes on all parameters.
conclusionThe dyspnea scale showed poor accuracy and discrimination when predicting hospitalization, stay at intensive care unit, and mortality on its own. However, the dyspnea scale may be beneficial as performance measure and indicator of out-of-hospital care.
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.