Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34011284›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2021

Calibrating a chief complaint list for low resource settings: a methodologic case study.

B Hansoti, E Hahn, A Rao, J Harris, A Jenson, N Markadakis, S Moonat, V Osula, A Pousson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

B HansotiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. bhansot1@jh.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0188-9764
E Hahn *Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
A Rao *Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
J HarrisDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
A JensonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
N MarkadakisDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
S MoonatDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
V OsulaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
A PoussonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases N/A (intramural)South African Medical Research Council N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe chief or presenting complaint is the reason for seeking health care, often in the patient's own words. In limited resource settings, a diagnosis-based approach to quantifying burden of disease is not possible, partly due to limited availability of an established lexicon or coding system. Our group worked with colleagues from the African Federation of Emergency Medicine building on the existing literature to create a pilot symptom list representing an attempt to standardize undifferentiated chief complaints in emergency and acute care settings. An ideal list for any setting is one that strikes a balance between ease of use and length, while covering the vast majority of diseases with enough detail to permit epidemiologic surveillance and make informed decisions about resource needs.

methodsThis study was incorporated as a part of a larger prospective observational study on human immunodeficiency virus testing in Emergency Departments in South Africa. The pilot symptom list was used for chief complaint coding in three Emergency Departments. Data was collected on 3357 patients using paper case report forms. Chief complaint terms were reviewed by two study team members to determine the frequency of concordance between the coded chief complaint term and the selected symptom(s) from the pilot symptom list.

resultsOverall, 3537 patients' chief complaints were reviewed, of which 640 were identified as 'potential mismatches.' When considering the 191 confirmed mismatches (29.8%), the Delphi process identified 6 (3.1%) false mismatches and 185 (96.9%) true mismatches. Significant chief-complaint clustering was identified with 9 sets of complaints frequently selected together for the same patient. "Pain" was used 2076 times for 58.7% of all patients. A combination of user feedback and expert-panel modified Delphi analysis of mismatched complaints and clustered complaints resulted in several substantial changes to the pilot symptom list.

conclusionsThis study presented a systematic methodology for calibrating a chief complaint list for the local context. Our revised list removed/reworded symptoms that frequently clustered together or were misinterpreted by health professionals. Recommendations for additions, modifications, and/or deletions from the pilot chief complaint list we believe will improve the functionality of the list in low resource environments.

Indexed as

Chief complaintEmergency departmentSymptom list

Identifiers

PMID34011284
PMCPMC8132346
OpenAlexW3111235637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.