Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35874581›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022

Performance of Pediatric Risk of Mortality III and Pediatric Index of Mortality III Scores in Tertiary Pediatric Intensive Unit in Saudi Arabia.

Ahmed S Alkhalifah, Abdulaziz AlSoqati, Jihad Zahraa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Comparative Performance of Pediatric Risk of Mortality IV and Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 in Critically Ill Children with Cancer: A Prospective Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Ahmed S AlkhalifahQatif Central Hospital, Al-Qatif, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz AlSoqatiKing Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Jihad ZahraaKing Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess the performance of the Pediatric Risk of Mortality III (PRISM III) and Pediatric Index of Mortality III (PIM III) indices in a tertiary pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in Saudi Arabia and to identify the factors affecting the observed performance. Design: Retrospective, single-center study using data collected from the Virtual Pediatric Systems web-based database. Setting: King Fahad Medical City PICU, Saudi Arabia. Patients: All pediatric patients <14 years of age admitted between 1 January 2015, and 31 December 2019. Interventions: Comparison of PRISM III and PIM III performances in predicting mortality across different age groups, disease categories, and resuscitation decision statuses. Measurements: Normality of distribution was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. Patient characteristics were compared between survivors and non-survivors. The medians and ranges were calculated for continuous data, whereas frequencies and percentages were used for nominal data. The Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Chi-square test were used to compare the characteristics of survivors and non-survivors. Main Results: There was a significant difference between the predicted mortality and observed mortality in both the PRISM III and PIM III. Better discrimination was found after excluding do-not-resuscitate (DNR) patients. The worst calibration and discrimination were recorded for infants <12 months of age. The PRISM III performed significantly better in patients with metabolic/genetic and central nervous system illnesses. Non-DNR patients had a lower standardized mortality rate using the PRISM III and PIM III. The PRISM III and PIM III indices performed better in patients who died within the first week of admission. Conclusion: These models had sufficient discrimination ability and poor calibration. Since they were designed for particular patient characteristics and PICUs, further testing in different environments is necessary before utilization for planning and assessing performance. Alternatively, new models could be developed which are suitable for local PICUs.

Indexed as

calibrationdiscriminationmortalityPediatric Index of Mortalitypediatric intensive care unitPediatric Risk of Mortality score

Identifiers

PMID35874581
PMCPMC9300935

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.