ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2026
Performance of the Dutch Pediatric Early Warning Score: a nationwide study in academic, large teaching and general hospital contexts, using real-world data.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2026. 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
backgroundIn recent years, there has been a global increase in largely unvalidated Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS) systems. In 2019, the Dutch PEWS was developed to standardise practices within the Netherlands. This system incorporates (1) a vital function score component comprising a minimal coreset of vital parameters, (2) a risk sign component covering worried and watcher signs and (3) risk stratification. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the Dutch PEWS and its individual components in detecting deterioration in hospitalised children across and between various hospital contexts.
methodsThis study is part of a national study that implements and evaluates the Dutch PEWS in hospitals with diverse contexts. Mean detection rates were calculated to assess whether clinical deterioration (defined by the endpoints 'unplanned paediatric intensive care unit transfer', 'resuscitation', 'paediatric medical emergency team support' and 'advanced paediatric life support intervention') was alarmed timely by the Dutch PEWS. For children who did not reach an endpoint the number of non-case alarms was used to assess full impact on children and healthcare providers.
resultsData from 12 hospitals, 20 708 admissions and 342 achieved endpoints (events) were available. The mean detection rate for the Dutch PEWS was 83.9%. The vital function score component demonstrated a mean detection rate of 47.6%, highest in large teaching hospitals and the risk sign component reached 70.6%, highest in university medical centres. Non-case alarms occurred in 24.4% of the admissions, mainly related to the (standard) use of watcher signs (23.4%) and no to vital function score alarms (6.7%).
conclusionThe Dutch PEWS demonstrated good overall performance in detecting deterioration, but performance differed across and between hospital contexts. Importantly, the contribution of the vital function score component to performance seemed limited, whereas the risk sign component appeared to make a substantial contribution, especially in complex hospital environments.
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.