ArticleNursing open2021
Pediatric early warning score versus a paediatric triage tool in the emergency department: A reliability study.
Article in Nursing open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability and validity of Chengdu pediatric emergency triage criteria: case study of a single center in China.BMC pediatrics · 2023Article
- Validation of the Computerized Pediatric Triage Tool,Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Pediatric early warning score versus a paediatric triage tool in the emergency department: A reliability study.Nursing 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimIn the paediatric emergency department (PED), it is important to correctly prioritize children for physician assessment. The pediatric early warning score (PEWS), although not a triage tool, is often used for PED triage. The scandinavian Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System-pediatric (RETTS-p) is a reliability tested triage tool. We aimed to compare PEWS and RETTS-p in a Norwegian PED.
designA reliability study.
methodsThe PED nurse routinely did PEWS observations, while the principal investigator concomitantly made RETTS-p observations. Inter-tool agreement was calculated for the complete PEWS and RETTS-p and for vital signs scores, disregarding the RETTS-p emergency symptoms and signs (ESS).
resultsRapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System-pediatric assigned a higher urgency than PEWS. The inter-tool agreement between PEWS and RETTS-p was low (weighted kappa [95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32 [0.24-0.40]]). Weighted kappa (95% CI) was 0.50 (0.41-0.59) for PEWS and RETTS-p without ESS, indicating that PEWS is not equivalent to five-level triage tools.
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.