SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2023
Acute assessment services for patient flow assistance in hospital emergency departments.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing efficiency in the acute care chain: a systematic review on the implementation and impact of interdisciplinary short-term monitoring in acute care units.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Acute assessment services for patient flow assistance in hospital emergency departments.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Hospitalization experience and associated factors among Chinese patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmergency departments (EDs) are facing serious and significant issues in the delivery of effective and efficient care to patients. Acute assessment services have been implemented at many hospitals internationally to assist in maintaining patient flow for identified groups of patients attending the ED. Identifying the risks and benefits, and optimal configurations of these services may be beneficial to those wishing to utilise an acute assessment service to improve patient flow.
objectivesTo assess the effects of acute assessment services on patient flow following attendance at a hospital ED. SEARCH
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase and two trials registers on 24 September 2022 to identify studies. No restrictions were imposed on publication year, publication type, or publication language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies eligible for inclusion were randomised trials and cluster-randomised trials with at least two intervention and two control sites. Participants were adults (as defined by study authors) receiving care either in the ED or the acute assessment service, where both were based in the hospital setting. The comparison was hospital-based acute assessment services with usual, ED-only care. The outcomes of this review were mortality at time point closest to 30 days, length of stay in the service (in minutes), and waiting time to see a doctor (in minutes). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed the standard procedures of Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care for this review (https://epoc.cochrane.org/resources). MAIN
resultsWe identified a total of 5754 records in the search. Following assessment of 3609 de-duplicated records, none were found to be eligible for inclusion in this review. AUTHORS'
conclusionsAt present there are no randomised controlled trials exploring the effects of acute assessment services on patient flow in hospital-based emergency departments compared to usual, ED-only care.
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.