Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39053964›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Efficacy and safety of a digital check-in and triage kiosk in emergency departments: a systematic review protocol.

Himani Laxshmi Kaur Sehgal, Geva Greenfield, Ana Luisa Neves, Mark Harmon, Azeem Majeed, Benedict Hayhoe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
–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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Use of a Kiosk-Model Self-Triage System for COVID-19 Triage.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Himani Laxshmi Kaur SehgalSchool of Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0009-0009-4561-6523
Geva GreenfieldDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ana Luisa NevesDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7107-7211
Mark HarmoneConsult Health Ltd, London, UK.
Azeem MajeedDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2357-9858
Benedict HayhoeDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK b.hayhoe@imperial.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIncreasing demand for healthcare services worldwide has led to unprecedented challenges in managing patient flow and delivering timely care in emergency care settings. Overcrowding, prolonged waiting times, reduced patient satisfaction and increased mortality are some of the consequences of this increased demand. To address this issue, some healthcare providers have turned to digital systems, such as self-check-in kiosks, for efficient patient triage and prioritisation. While digital triage systems hold promise for efficient patient prioritisation, reduced data duplication, shorter waiting times, improved patient satisfaction, the impact on workflow, the accuracy of triage and staff workload require further exploration for successful implementation in emergency care settings. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of digital check-in and triage kiosk implementation within emergency departments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review will be conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, Scopus and Science Direct and will include quantitative and mixed method studies with a significant quantitative component, related to self-service kiosk implementation in emergency departments. The outcomes of interest will focus on the efficacy and safety of digital triage, including triage time, workflow, the diagnostic accuracy of triage and adverse events. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. A narrative synthesis will be used to summarise the findings of the included studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review is exempt from ethical approval because it will be analysing published studies containing non-identifiable data. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024481506.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalSystematic Reviews as TopicTriageHumansPatient SatisfactionResearch DesignWorkflowACCIDENT & EMERGENCY MEDICINEeHealthSafety

Identifiers

PMID39053964
PMCPMC11284892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.