Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34321893›Full record

ArticleInfection and drug resistance2021

Prognostic Accuracy of SOFA, qSOFA, and SIRS for Mortality Among Emergency Department Patients with Infections.

S M Osama Bin Abdullah, Rune Husås Sørensen, Finn Erland Nielsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Screening tools for sepsis identification in paramedicine and other emergency contexts: a rapid systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

3 authors.

S M Osama Bin AbdullahDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Slagelse Hospital, Slagelse, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-7866-2790
Rune Husås SørensenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Slagelse Hospital, Slagelse, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6691-2681
Finn Erland NielsenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Slagelse, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7650-6927

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to determine the prognostic accuracy of SOFA in comparison to quick-SOFA (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in predicting 28-day mortality in the emergency department (ED) patients with infections.

methodsA secondary analysis of data from a prospective study of adult patients with documented or suspected infections admitted to an ED in Denmark from Oct-2017 to Mar-2018. The SOFA scores were calculated after adjustment for chronic diseases. The prognostic accuracy was assessed by analysis of sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

resultsA total of 2045 patients with a median age of 73.2 (IQR: 60.9-82.1) years were included. The overall 28-day mortality was 7.7%. In patients meeting a SOFA score ≥2, qSOFA score ≥2, and SIRS criteria ≥2 the 28-day mortality was 13.6% (11.2-16.3), 17.8% (12.4-24.3) and 8.3% (6.7-10.2), respectively. SOFA ≥2 had a sensitivity of 61.4% (53.3-69.0) and specificity of 67.3% (65.1-69.4), qSOFA ≥2 had a sensitivity of 19.6% (13.7-26.7) and specificity of 92.4% (91.1-93.6), and SIRS ≥2 had a sensitivity of 52.5% (44.4-60.5) and specificity of 51.5% (49.2-53.7). The AUROC for SOFA compared to SIRS was: 0.68 vs 0.52; p<0.001 and compared to qSOFA: 0.68 vs 0.63; p=0.018.

conclusionA SOFA score of at least two had better prognostic accuracy for 28-day mortality than SIRS and qSOFA. However, the overall accuracy of SOFA was poor for the prediction of 28-day mortality.

Indexed as

emergency departmentinfectious diseasemortalityprognostic accuracyqSOFAsepsisSIRSSOFA

Identifiers

PMID34321893
PMCPMC8313375

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.