ArticleWorld journal of emergency medicine2022
Comparison of different versions of the quick sequential organ failure assessment for predicting in-hospital mortality of sepsis patients: A retrospective observational study.
Article in World journal of emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Early Mortality Prediction in Septic Patients Using Routine Post-Diagnosis Clinical Data: A Multicenter Study.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Observational
- Prediction of sepsis within 24 hours at the triage stage in emergency departments using machine learning.World journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Effects of continuous renal replacement therapy on inflammation-related anemia, iron metabolism and prognosis in sepsis patients with acute kidney injury.World journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Role of serum lactate as prognostic marker of mortality among emergency department patients with multiple conditions: A systematic review.SAGE open medicine · 2023Review
- Modified qSOFA score based on parameters quickly available at bedside for better clinical practice.World journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Comment on "Comparison of different versions of the quick sequential organ failure assessment for predicting in-hospital mortality of sepsis patients".World journal of 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) is recommended to identify sepsis and predict sepsis mortality. However, some studies have recently shown its poor performance in sepsis mortality prediction. To enhance its effectiveness, researchers have developed various revised versions of the qSOFA by adding other parameters, such as the lactate-enhanced qSOFA (LqSOFA), the procalcitonin-enhanced qSOFA (PqSOFA), and the modified qSOFA (MqSOFA). This study aimed to compare the performance of these versions of the qSOFA in predicting sepsis mortality in the emergency department (ED).
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed data obtained from an electronic register system of adult patients with sepsis between January 1 and December 31, 2019. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to determine the area under the curve (AUC), with sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values calculated for the various scores.
resultsAmong the 936 enrolled cases, there were 835 survivors and 101 deaths. The AUCs of the LqSOFA, MqSOFA, PqSOFA, and qSOFA were 0.740, 0.731, 0.712, and 0.705, respectively. The sensitivity of the LqSOFA, MqSOFA, PqSOFA, and qSOFA were 64.36%, 51.40%, 71.29%, and 39.60%, respectively. The specificity of the four scores were 70.78%, 80.96%, 61.68%, and 91.62%, respectively. The LqSOFA and MqSOFA were superior to the qSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality.
conclusionsAmong patients with sepsis in the ED, the performance of the PqSOFA was similar to that of the qSOFA and the values of the LqSOFA and MqSOFA in predicting in-hospital mortality were greater compared to qSOFA. As the added parameter of the MqSOFA was more convenient compared to the LqSOFA, the MqSOFA could be used as a candidate for the revised qSOFA to increase the performance of the early prediction of sepsis mortality.
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.