Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34686088›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of medicine2021

An observational cohort study of the performance of the REDS score compared to the SIRS criteria, NEWS2, CURB65, SOFA, MEDS and PIRO scores to risk-stratify emergency department suspected sepsis.

Narani Sivayoham, Adil N Hussain, Luke Shabbo, Dylon Christie

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The Ability of NEWS2 to Detect Sepsis in Adult Patients With Positive Blood Cultures.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Narani SivayohamDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Adil N HussainDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Luke ShabboDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Dylon ChristieDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the performance of the Risk-stratification of Emergency Department suspected Sepsis (REDS) score to the SIRS criteria, NEWS2, CURB65, SOFA, MEDS and PIRO scores, to risk-stratify Emergency Department (ED) suspected sepsis patients for mortality.

methodA retrospective observational cohort study of prospectively collected data. Adult patients admitted from the ED after receiving intravenous antibiotics for suspected sepsis in the year 2020, were studied. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. The scores stated above were calculated for each patient. Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curves were constructed for each score for the primary outcome measure, all-cause in-hospital mortality. The area under the ROC (AUROC) curves and cut-off points were identified by the statistical software. Scores above the cut-off point were deemed high-risk. The test characteristics of the high-risk groups were calculated. Comparisons were based on the AUROC curve and sensitivity for mortality of the high-risk groups. Previously published cut-off points were also studied. Calibration was also studied.

resultsOf the 2594 patients studied, 332 (12.8%) died. The AUROC curve for the REDS score 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.75) was significantly greater than the AUROC curve for the SIRS criteria 0.51 (95% CI 0.49-0.53),

conclusionsIn this single centre study, the REDS score had either a greater AUROC curve or sensitivity for mortality compared to the comparator scores, at the respective cut-off points identified.KEY MESSAGESThe REDS score is a simple and objective scoring system to risk-stratify for mortality in emergency department (MED) patients with suspected sepsis.The REDS score is better or equivalent to existing scoring systems in its discrimination for mortality.

Indexed as

Severity of Illness IndexAdministration, IntravenousAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentAnti-Bacterial AgentsClinical prediction rulediscriminationemergency departmentprognosissepsisseptic shock

Identifiers

PMID34686088
PMCPMC8547872
OpenAlexW3207776369

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.