SynthesisEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2025
Review article: Use of prehospital early warning scores to predict short-term mortality: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 2025. 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.
- Early warning scores and peripheral perfusion index: A Comparative assessment for 30-day mortality in critical patients in emergency departments.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Assessing Risk of Early ICU Admission or Death at Emergency Department Triage: Clinical Judgment Versus Early Warning Scores.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Observational
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
Early Warning Scores (EWS) have been developed to identify patients at risk of deterioration. Although the application of EWS has become increasingly established in the prehospital setting, their use remains contentious. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the most recent evidence on the predictive accuracy of the EWS for short-term mortality in adults in the prehospital setting. A systematic search was conducted using the Medline, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. Studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the prehospital Modified Early Warning Score, National Early Warning Score or National Early Warning Score 2 in predicting mortality were included. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) admission and hospital admission. The review included 16 studies published between 2012 and 2023, with the number of patients totalling 311 932. The literature indicated that prehospital EWS demonstrated a moderate to good diagnostic performance in predicting short-term mortality with an area under receiver operating characteristic curve ranging from 0.68 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64-0.73) to 0.90 (95% CI: 0.82-0.97). Overall, diagnostic performance was higher for predicting mortality in short time frames (up to 48 h). The need to use relatively high cut-off points to identify at-risk patients may limit its use for the unselected patient populations found in the prehospital setting. The potential for under-triage and over-triage limits their use further. EWS should not replace structured clinical evaluation and judgement but may be useful as complementary and objective tools to aid the identification of patients at risk.
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.