ArticleQatar medical journal2021
Qatar Prediction Rule Using ED Indicators of COVID-19 at Triage.
Article in Qatar medical journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe presence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its associated disease, COVID-19 has had an enormous impact on the operations of the emergency department (ED), particularly the triage area. The aim of the study was to derive and validate a prediction rule that would be applicable to Qatar's adult ED population to predict COVID-19-positive patients.
methodsThis is a retrospective study including adult patients. The data were obtained from the electronic medical records (EMR) of the Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC) for three EDs. Data from the Hamad General Hospital ED were used to derive and internally validate a prediction rule (Q-PREDICT). The Al Wakra Hospital ED and Al Khor Hospital ED data formed an external validation set consisting of the same time frame. The variables in the model included the weekly ED COVID-19-positivity rate and the following patient characteristics: region (nationality), age, acuity, cough, fever, tachypnea, hypoxemia, and hypotension. All statistical analyses were executed with Stata 16.1 (Stata Corp). The study team obtained appropriate institutional approval.
resultsThe study included 45,663 adult patients who were tested for COVID-19. Out of these, 47% (n = 21461) were COVID-19 positive. The derivation-set model had very good discrimination (c = 0.855, 95% Confidence intervals (CI) 0.847-0.861). Cross-validation of the model demonstrated that the validation-set model (c = 0.857, 95% CI 0.849-0.863) retained high discrimination. A high Q-PREDICT score ( ≥ 13) is associated with a nearly 6-fold increase in the likelihood of being COVID-19 positive (likelihood ratio 5.9, 95% CI 5.6-6.2), with a sensitivity of 84.7% (95% CI, 84.0%-85.4%). A low Q-PREDICT ( ≤ 6) is associated with a nearly 20-fold increase in the likelihood of being COVID-19 negative (likelihood ratio 19.3, 95% CI 16.7-22.1), with a specificity of 98.7% (95% CI 98.5%-98.9%).
conclusionThe Q-PREDICT is a simple scoring system based on information readily collected from patients at the front desk of the ED and helps to predict COVID-19 status at triage. The scoring system performed well in the internal and external validation on datasets obtained from the state of Qatar.
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.