ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Exploiting the Features of Clinical Judgment to Improve Assessment of Disease Severity in the Emergency Department: An Acutelines Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge and associated factors regarding oxygen therapy among Emergency Department clinicians at an Ethiopian hospital: a cross-sectional study.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2026Article
- Quantification of facial cues for acute illness: a systematic scoping review.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Review
- Psychotropic Drugs for Older Adults With Psychiatric Disorders Presenting to the Emergency Department: Prescription Patterns and Treatment Outcomes.Psychiatric research and clinical practice · 2025Article
- Random forest differentiation of Escherichia coli in elderly sepsis using biomarkers and infectious sites.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical judgment, also known as gestalt or gut feeling, can predict deterioration and can be easily and rapidly obtained. To date, it is unknown what clinical judgement precisely entails. The aim of this study was to elucidate which features define the clinical impression of health care professionals in the ED.
methodA nominal group technique (NGT) was used to develop a consensus-based instrument to measure the clinical impression score (CIS, scale 1-10) and to identify features associated with either a more severe or less severe estimated disease severity. This single-center observational cohort study included 517 medical patients visiting the ED. The instrument was prospectively validated.. The predictive value of each feature for the clinical impression was assessed using multivariate linear regression analyses to adjust for potential confounders and validated in the infection group.
resultsThe CIS at the ED was associated with ICU admission (OR 1.67 [1.37-2.03],
conclusionWe identified several features that were associated with the clinical impression of health care professionals in the ED. Translating the subjective features and objective measurements into quantifiable parameters may aid the development of a novel triage tool to identify patients at risk of deterioration in the ED.
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.