Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40585421›Full record

ArticleToxicology research2025

A comparison of different scores for mortality prediction of acutely poisoned patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Meng Wei, Xiaopeng Tu, Huan Li, Qiang Liu, Yu Tian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicology research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Meng WeiDepartment of Emergency, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Donghu Road 169, Wuhan 430071, Hubei Province, China.
Xiaopeng TuDepartment of Emergency, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Donghu Road 169, Wuhan 430071, Hubei Province, China.
Huan LiDepartment of Emergency, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Donghu Road 169, Wuhan 430071, Hubei Province, China.
Qiang LiuDepartment of Emergency, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Donghu Road 169, Wuhan 430071, Hubei Province, China.
Yu TianDepartment of Emergency, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Donghu Road 169, Wuhan 430071, Hubei Province, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute poisoning typically accounts for 1%-3% of all emergency department (ED) visits, and comprise 4%-40% of admissions to intensive care units (ICU), with a mortality rate of 3%-6%. Accurate assessment of patient prognosis enables the early implementation of appropriate interventions and the effective allocation of limited resources, thereby preventing adverse outcomes. However, it remains unclear which tool offers superior predictive accuracy for the prognosis of poisoned patients. In this article, we review existing assessment tools used to predict mortality risk in poisoned patients and compare their performance. We conducted comprehensive searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and SinoMed databases from their inception up to January 2025. Studies were included if they reported the performance of at least one scoring systems for predicting mortality in patients with acute poisoning. The PRISMA guidelines were followed (PROSPERO registration: CRD42024579941). Data of 60,403 patients across 65 studies were eligible for inclusion. The risk assessment tools reported in more than three studies included APACHE II (47), SOFA (19), SAPS II (11), PSS (16), MEWS (8), REMS (5), new-PMS (5). Significant heterogeneity was observed in the pooled analysis. In this study, PSS exhibited moderate sensitivity and specificity in predicting mortality among patients with acute poisoning, while MEWS demonstrated the highest sensitivity, and new-PMS showed the strongest specificity. The highest AUC values were observed for MEWS and APACHE II. Based on these findings, MEWS and new-PMS may represent the optimal tools for predicting in-hospital/28-day/30-day mortality in poisoned patients.

Indexed as

meta-analysismortalitypoisoning

Identifiers

PMID40585421
PMCPMC12205934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.