ArticlePloS one2022
Implementation of prediction models in the emergency department from an implementation science perspective-Determinants, outcomes and real-world impact: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Epidemiology and outcomes of critically ill patients in the emergency department of a tertiary teaching hospital in Rwanda.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Digitisation of emergency medicine: opportunities, examples and issues for consideration.Singapore medical journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The number of prediction models developed for use in emergency departments (EDs) have been increasing in recent years to complement traditional triage systems. However, most of these models have only reached the development or validation phase, and few have been implemented in clinical practice. There is a gap in knowledge on the real-world performance of prediction models in the ED and how they can be implemented successfully into routine practice. Existing reviews of prediction models in the ED have also mainly focused on model development and validation. The aim of this scoping review is to summarize the current landscape and understanding of implementation of predictions models in the ED. This scoping review follows the Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. We will include studies that report implementation outcomes and/or contextual determinants according to the RE-AIM/PRISM framework for prediction models used in EDs. We will include outcomes or contextual determinants studied at any point of time in the implementation process except for effectiveness, where only post-implementation results will be included. Conference abstracts, theses and dissertations, letters to editors, commentaries, non-research documents and non-English full-text articles will be excluded. Four databases (MEDLINE (through PubMed), Embase, Scopus and CINAHL) will be searched from their inception using a combination of search terms related to the population, intervention and outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for inclusion and any discrepancy resolved with a third reviewer. Results from included studies will be summarized narratively according to the RE-AIM/PRISM outcomes and domains. Where appropriate, a simple descriptive summary of quantitative outcomes may be performed.
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.