Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37915483›Full record

ArticleToxicology research2023

Comparison of different scores as predictors of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit admission in acute theophylline poisoning.

Ghada Attia Sagah, Alshaimma Mahmoud Elmansy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicology research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ghada Attia SagahForensic Medicine and Clinical Toxicology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Medical collages complex, 6 th Floor, Al-Geish Street, Tanta University, Tanta, Elgharbya 31527, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0704-8539
Alshaimma Mahmoud ElmansyForensic Medicine and Clinical Toxicology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Medical collages complex, 6 th Floor, Al-Geish Street, Tanta University, Tanta, Elgharbya 31527, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4273-8030
Tanta University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Theophylline is commonly used to control respiratory diseases, especially in developing countries. Theophylline has a narrowed therapeutic index, and its toxicity is associated with morbidity and mortality. Physicians should be aware of the early prediction of the need for intensive care unit admission (ICU) and mechanical ventilation (MV). Aim: This study aimed to assess the power of the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and Simple Clinical Score (SCS) in predicting the need for ICU admission and/or MV in acute theophylline-poisoned patients. Patients and methods: This cross-sectional study included 58 patients with acute theophylline poisoning who were admitted to our Poison Control Center from the 1 Results: The median values of all studied scores were significantly high among patients who needed MV and/or ICU admission. The AUC of SCS was >0.9, with a sensitivity of 92.9% and specificity of 90.9% for the prediction of ICU admission. Meanwhile, MEWS was an excellent predictor of the need for MV (AUC = 0.996, 95% CI = 0.983-1.000). Conclusions: We recommend using SCS as an early predictor for ICU admission in acute theophylline-poisoned patients. However, MEWS could effectively predict MV requirements in acute theophylline-poisoned patients.

Indexed as

modified early warning scorerapid emergency medicine scoresimple clinical scoretheophylline poisoning

Identifiers

PMID37915483
PMCPMC10615812
OpenAlexW4387327401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.