ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2021
A comparison of scoring systems for predicting mortality and sepsis in the emergency department patients with a suspected infection.
Article in Clinical and experimental emergency 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening tools for sepsis identification in paramedicine and other emergency contexts: a rapid systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Simplified Prehospital Sepsis Screening Tools for Identifying Sepsis and Predicting 30-Day Mortality: A Retrospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Clinical epidemiology · 2026Article
- Performance of Early Sepsis Screening Tools for Timely Diagnosis and Antibiotic Stewardship in a Resource-Limited Thai Community Hospital.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluating Sepsis Mortality Predictions from the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing qSOFA, the National Early Warning Score, and the International Early Warning Score.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Accuracy of the SIL Score for Predicting the Sepsis Mortality in Emergency Department Triages: A Comparative Analysis with NEWS and SOFA.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Navigating the Complexity of Scoring Systems in Sepsis Management: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Comparing 11 early warning scores and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department.World journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Prognostic Accuracy of SpOThe western journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Prognostic Performance of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III, and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II Scores in Patients with Suspected Infection According to Intensive Care Unit Type.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Audit of a computerized version of the Manchester triage system and a SIRS-based system for the detection of sepsis at triage in the emergency department.International journal of emergency medicine · 2022Article
- A quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-negative result at triage is associated with low compliance with sepsis bundles: a retrospective analysis of a multicenter prospective registry.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to compare the modified National Early Warning Score (mNEWS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score, modified Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (mSIRS) score, and modified Search Out Severity (mSOS) score in predicting mortality and sepsis among patients suspected of first observed infections in the emergency department. The modified scores were created by removing variables for simplicity.
methodsThis was a prospective cohort study that enrolled adult patients presenting at the emergency department with signs and symptoms suggesting infection. The mNEWS, qSOFA score, mSIRS score, and mSOS score were calculated using triage data. The SOFA score was a reference standard for sepsis diagnosis. All patients were monitored for up to 30 days after the initial visit to measure each scoring system's ability to predict 30-day mortality and sepsis.
resultsThere were 260 patients included in the study. The 30-day mortality prediction with mNEWS ≥5 had the highest sensitivity (91.18%). The highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the 30-day mortality prediction was mNEWS (0.607), followed by qSOFA (0.605), mSOS (0.550), and mSIRS (0.423). The sepsis prediction with mNEWS ≥5 had the highest sensitivity (96.48%). The highest AUC for the sepsis prediction was also mNEWS (0.685), followed by qSOFA (0.605), mSOS (0.480), and mSIRS (0.477).
conclusionmNEWS was an acceptable scoring system screening tool for predicting mortality and sepsis in patients with a suspected infection.
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.