ArticleBMC pediatrics2024
Evaluation of unplanned reattendances to the pediatric emergency department - a five-year study.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare utilisation patterns for paediatric functional somatic symptom presentation: a 3-year retrospective analysis.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Assessment of quality of care in a pediatric emergency unit of a tertiary hospital, Ethiopia.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnplanned reattendances (UR) are an important quality indicator in the emergency department (ED). Understanding the risk factors associated with UR can aid clinicians in optimizing the allocation of time and resources, as well as targeted counselling for this specific group of patients. In this study, we aimed to compare patient characteristics between children who attended a pediatric emergency department (ED) with unplanned reattendances (UR) and those without UR. We also aimed to study the association between healthcare delivery factors such as timing of the attendance, patient load, changeover months for rotating junior doctors, presence of supervision, and rate of UR. STUDY
designWe performed a retrospective, single-center cohort study of patients < 18 years old who visited the ED between January 2018 and March 2023. UR was defined as a revisit within 72 h of the index ED visit. We collected data on demographics, attendance data and clinical characteristics. Logistic regression was performed for factors independently associated with UR, after adjusting for age, patient acuity, timing of attendance, presence of senior doctor supervision, rotation months for junior doctors, and diagnostic category.
resultsOut of the 544,699 eligible children, 24,733 (4.5%) reattended the ED within 72 h, of which 10,915 (44.1%) of them were hospitalized on their reattendance visit. The independent factors associated with UR were young age (age < 3 years old: aOR 1.585 95%CI 1.481-1.698, p < 0.001), high acuity P2+ (aOR 1.398 95%CI 1.354-1.444, p < 0.001), attendance in the evening (aOR 1.086 95%CI 1.055-1.117, p < 0.001) and night (aOR 1.365 95%CI 1.314-1.417, p < 0.001), gastrointestinal diagnosis (aOR 1.528, CI 1.469-1.588; p < 0.001) and respiratory diagnosis (aOR 1.155, CI 1.121-1.189, p < 0.001).
conclusionsWe identified independent risk factors for UR that could guide resource allocation. Future studies should investigate if targeted interventions may reduce UR in these at-risk populations.
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.