ArticleBMC emergency medicine2021
Development and validation of a scoring system for mortality prediction and application of standardized W statistics to assess the performance of emergency departments.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Smart emergency care: a narrative review of predictive machine learning models.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Development of a severity score based on the International Classification of Disease-10 for general patients visiting emergency centers.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of Standardized Mortality Ratios in seven Dutch EDs based on presenting complaints.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Scoring Systems to Evaluate the Mortality Risk of Patients with Emphysematous Cystitis: A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a predictive scoring system for in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 Egyptian patients: a retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- An external validation study of the Score for Emergency Risk Prediction (SERP), an interpretable machine learning-based triage score for the emergency department.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of In-Hospital Mortality between Dedicated Regional Trauma Centers and Emergency Medical Centers in the Republic of Korea.Emergency medicine international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn-hospital mortality and short-term mortality are indicators that are commonly used to evaluate the outcome of emergency department (ED) treatment. Although several scoring systems and machine learning-based approaches have been suggested to grade the severity of the condition of ED patients, methods for comparing severity-adjusted mortality in general ED patients between different systems have yet to be developed. The aim of the present study was to develop a scoring system to predict mortality in ED patients using data collected at the initial evaluation and to validate the usefulness of the scoring system for comparing severity-adjusted mortality between institutions with different severity distributions.
methodsThe study was based on the registry of the National Emergency Department Information System, which is maintained by the National Emergency Medical Center of the Republic of Korea. Data from 2016 were used to construct the prediction model, and data from 2017 were used for validation. Logistic regression was used to build the mortality prediction model. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the performance of the prediction model. We calculated the standardized W statistic and its 95% confidence intervals using the newly developed mortality prediction model.
resultsThe area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the developed scoring system for the prediction of mortality was 0.883 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.882-0.884). The Ws score calculated from the 2016 dataset was 0.000 (95% CI: - 0.021 - 0.021). The Ws score calculated from the 2017 dataset was 0.049 (95% CI: 0.030-0.069).
conclusionsThe scoring system developed in the present study utilizing the parameters gathered in initial ED evaluations has acceptable performance for the prediction of in-hospital mortality. Standardized W statistics based on this scoring system can be used to compare the performance of an ED with the reference data or with the performance of other institutions.
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.