Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34233976›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Development and internal validation of a simple prognostic score for early sepsis risk stratification in the emergency department.

Bofu Liu, Dongze Li, Yisong Cheng, Jing Yu, Yu Jia, Qin Zhang, Yanmei Liu, Yu Cao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Bofu LiuEmergency Department, Sichuan University West China Hospital, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9210-8462
Dongze LiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yisong ChengDepartment of Emergency Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jing YuWest China School of Nursing, Sichuan University West China Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Yu JiaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qin ZhangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yanmei LiuChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center and CREAT Group, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yu CaoEmergency Department, Sichuan University West China Hospital, Chengdu, China caoyu@wchscu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesNo validated, simple, powerful and continuously monitorable risk prediction tools are available for patients with sepsis during the early phases in the emergency department (ED). We sought to derive a novel Simple Sepsis Early Prognostic Score (SSEPS) composed of physiological indicators that do not depend on laboratory tests and that can be used by emergency clinicians in predicting outcomes in patients with sepsis.

designRetrospective cohort analysis of a collected data source.

participantsPatients with sepsis admitted to the ED of the West China Hospital of Sichuan University between July 2015 and June 2016 were included. We excluded patients who were pregnant, those with cardiac or respiratory arrest, and those using vasoactive drugs before admission to the ED. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: 28-day all-cause mortality.

resultsThe SSEPS consisted of age, heart rate, respiratory rate and altered consciousness. Patients in the development cohort with higher SSEPS had a significantly higher mortality (first tertile vs second tertile vs third tertile: 12.5% vs 28.6% vs 53.5%, p<0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for SSEPS was 0.762 (95% CI 0.686 to 0.838), which was similar to Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) (area under the curve: 0.745, 95% CI 0.692 to 0.798) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) (area under the curve: 0.750, 95% CI 0.681 to 0.819). Moreover, the decision curve analysis showed that the net benefit of SSEPS was higher than SOFA and APACHE II at any probability threshold.

conclusionThe SSEPS is simple and useful for clinicians in stratifying high-risk patients with sepsis at the early phase of ED admission.

Indexed as

SepsisChinaEmergency Service, HospitalHumansIntensive Care UnitsOrgan Dysfunction ScoresPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentROC Curveinfectious diseasesintensive & critical carerisk management

Identifiers

PMID34233976
PMCPMC8264891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.