ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health2025
InfoKids+: A Validation Study of a Pediatric Acuity Risk Stratification Algorithm.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To prospectively validate InfoKids+, a pediatric acuity electronic risk stratification algorithm (eRSA), against a nurse-based triage standard (nbTS). Participants and Methods: We conducted a prospective validation study in a Swiss university hospital pediatric emergency department to assess the performance of a pediatric acuity eRSA, InfoKids+, on the basis of a well-established parental guidance application, InfoKids. Participants completed the eRSA once seated in a consultation booth. We compared the acuity levels from InfoKids+ (urgent, <4 hours; nonurgent, <24 hours; and no emergency, ≥24 hours) against an nbTS. The primary outcome was the level of agreement and rate of alignment between InfoKids+ and the reference standard. Results: We included 1990 participants from June 3, 2020, through January 31, 2022. InfoKids+ showed a slight level of agreement with the nbTS (κ Conclusion: In summary, our study uncovered notable discrepancies between the InfoKids+ algorithmic triage and conventional nurse-based triage. Our results highlight the critical need for rigorous validation of such tools for accuracy and safety before public release to ensure these tools are beneficial and do not inadvertently cause harm or misallocation of resources.
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.