ArticleBMJ open2024
Modifications to the National Early Warning Score: a scoping review protocol.
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 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.
- Investigating the Predictive Power of the National Early Warning Score in Predicting Outcomes Among Intensive Care Unit Patients.Critical care research and practice · 2026Article
- Predicting patient deterioration with physiological data using AI: systematic review protocol.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
- Improving the Predictive Accuracy of the National Early Warning Score 2: Protocol for Algorithm Refinement.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Modifications to the National Early Warning Score 2: a Scoping Review.BMC medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe National Early Warning Score (NEWS/2) system was developed to enable the detection and early intervention of patients at risk of clinical deterioration. It has demonstrated good accuracy in identifying imminent critical outcomes but has limitations in its applicability to various patient types and its ability to predict upcoming deterioration beyond 24 hours. Various studies have attempted to improve its predictive accuracy and clinical utility by modifying or adding variables to the standard NEWS/2 system. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify modifications to the NEWS and NEWS2 systems (eg, the inclusion of additional patient demographic, physiological or other characteristics) and how those modifications influence predictive accuracy to provide an evidence base for subsequent improvement of the system. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will be structured using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study frameworks. Six databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) will be searched in April 2024 for articles published in English. Article screening and data extraction will be conducted by two independent reviewers, with any conflicts resolved by discussion. The analysis will be descriptive to provide a summary of modifications identified and their influence on the predictive accuracy of NEWS/NEWS 2. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as data will be obtained from already published sources. Findings from this study will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.