Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34575690›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021

Application of a 72 h National Early Warning Score and Incorporation with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Predicting Sepsis Outcomes and Risk Stratification in an Intensive Care Unit: A Derivation and Validation Cohort Study.

Chih-Yi Hsu, Yi-Hsuan Tsai, Chiung-Yu Lin, Ya-Chun Chang, Hung-Cheng Chen, Yu-Ping Chang, Yu-Mu Chen, Kuo-Tung Huang, Yi-Hsi Wang, Chin-Chou Wang and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

12 authors.

Chih-Yi HsuDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-9556-6119
Yi-Hsuan TsaiDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-8891-3124
Chiung-Yu LinDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Ya-Chun ChangDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Hung-Cheng ChenDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Yu-Ping ChangDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-2535-5954
Yu-Mu ChenDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Kuo-Tung HuangDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Yi-Hsi WangDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Chin-Chou WangDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-2932-751X
Meng-Chih LinDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.
Wen-Feng FangDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-0350-9059

Funding

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital CMRPG8B1063Chang Gung Memorial Hospital CMRPG8H1171Chang Gung Memorial Hospital CMRPG8J0421
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigated the best timing for using the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) for predicting sepsis outcomes and whether combining the NEWS2 and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) was applicable for mortality risk stratification in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with severe sepsis. All adult patients who met the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock criteria between August 2013 and January 2017 with complete clinical parameters and laboratory data were enrolled as a derivation cohort. The primary outcomes were the 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortalities. Furthermore, another group of patients under the same setting between January 2020 and March 2020 were also enrolled as a validation cohort. In the derivation cohort, we included 699 consecutive adult patients. The 72 h NEWS2 had good discrimination for predicting 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortalities (AUC: 0.780, 0.724, 0.700, and 0.667, respectively) and was not inferior to the SOFA (AUC: 0.740, 0.680, 0.684, and 0.677, respectively). With the new combined NESO tool, the hazard ratio was 1.854 (1.203-2.950) for the intermediate-risk group and 6.810 (3.927-11.811) for the high-risk group relative to the low-risk group. This finding was confirmed in the validation cohort using a separated survival curve for 28-day mortality. The 72 h NEWS2 alone was non-inferior to the admission SOFA or day 3 SOFA for predicting sepsis outcomes. The NESO tool was found to be useful for 7-, 14-, 21-, and 28-day mortality risk stratification in patients with severe sepsis.

Indexed as

intensive care unitmortality risk stratificationNational Early Warning Score 2Sequential Organ Failure Assessmentsevere sepsis

Identifiers

PMID34575690
PMCPMC8465191

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.