ArticleBMC emergency medicine2025
Temporal validation of the Ramathibodi Older Sepsis Score (ROSS) for predicting 28-day mortality of older sepsis patients in the emergency department.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis in older patients is associated with a high mortality rate, presenting a considerable clinical challenge. Existing mortality prediction scoring systems have demonstrated limited accuracy in this population. The Ramathibodi Older Sepsis Score (ROSS) was developed to address this limitation. However, temporal validation is necessary to assess its efficacy in predicting 28-day mortality.
objectiveThis study aimed to validate the Ramathibodi Older Sepsis Score (ROSS) for predicting 28-day mortality in older sepsis patients in the emergency department (ED).
methodsData for the development cohort were retrospectively collected from August to December 2018, while data for the validation cohort were collected from January to June 2022. Seven prespecified prognostic factors for 28-day mortality were used to develop a predictive a predictive score and assess its performance.
resultsA total of 500 older sepsis patients were included in the validation cohort, and 599 patients were included in the development cohort. The predictive ability of the ROSS model in the validation cohort (Area under receiver operating characteristic curve; AuROC: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.61-0.77) decreased compared to the development cohort (AuROC: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.82-0.92); P < 0.01. This performance was compared with other scoring models: SIRS (AuROC: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.42-0.58; P < 0.01), qSOFA (AuROC: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64-0.77; P = 0.75), NEWS2 (AuROC: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.60-0.76; P = 0.81), and REWS (AuROC: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.57-0.75; P = 0.51).
conclusionThe temporal validation of the ROSS demonstrated moderate performance in predicting 28-day mortality in older sepsis patients, with AuROC values similar to qSOFA and NEWS2. Although ROSS did not outperform existing scores, it offers geriatric-specific insights and highlights the need for further validation.
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.