Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34787544›Full record

ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2021

A Scoping Review of Emergency Department Discharge Risk Stratification.

Todd A Jaffe, Daniel Wang, Bosten Loveless, Debbie Lai, Michael Loesche, Benjamin White, Ali S Raja, Shuhan He

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Scoping Review of Adult Emergency Department Discharge Interventions.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. 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 at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Todd A JaffeMassachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency, Boston, Massachusetts.
Daniel WangKansas City University School of Medicine, Kansas City, Missouri.
Bosten LovelessRocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ivins, Utah.
Debbie LaiUniversity College of London, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, London, England.
Michael LoescheMassachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency, Boston, Massachusetts.
Benjamin WhiteMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ali S RajaMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Shuhan HeMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Massachusetts General Hospital · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USHarvard Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency · USHarvard University · USKansas City University · USLanguage Science (South Korea) · KRRocky Vista University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough emergency department (ED) discharge presents patient-safety challenges and opportunities, the ways in which EDs address discharge risk in the general ED population remains disparate and largely uncharacterized. In this study our goal was to conduct a review of how EDs identify and target patients at increased risk at time of discharge.

methodsWe conducted a literature search to explore how EDs assess patient risk upon discharge, including a review of PubMed and gray literature. After independently screening articles for inclusion, we recorded study characteristics including outcome measures, patient risk factors, and tool descriptions. Based on this review and discussion among collaborators, major themes were identified.

resultsPubMed search yielded 384 potentially eligible articles. After title and abstract review, we screened 235 for potential inclusion. After full text and reference review, supplemented by Google Scholar and gray literature reviews, we included 30 articles for full review. Three major themes were elucidated: 1) Multiple studies include retrospective risk assessment, whereas the use of point-of-care risk assessment tools appears limited; 2) of the point-of-care tools that exist, inputs and outcome measures varied, and few were applicable to the general ED population; and 3) while many studies describe initiatives to improve the discharge process, few describe assessment of post-discharge resource needs.

conclusionNumerous studies describe factors associated with an increased risk of readmission and adverse events after ED discharge, but few describe point-of-care tools used by physicians for the general ED population. Future work is needed to investigate standardized tools that assess ED discharge risk and patients' needs upon ED discharge.

Indexed as

AftercarePatient DischargeEmergency Service, HospitalHumansRetrospective StudiesRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID34787544
PMCPMC8597698
OpenAlexW3200006707

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.