ArticleSaudi medical journal2026
Critically Ill Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department; Outcome Review in a Tertiary Care Center.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Critically ill patients presenting to the emergency department require prompt recognition and prioritized care due to the severity of their conditions. Reviewing their clinical outcomes helps guide future planning and resource allocation. This study aims to highlight the outcomes of patients triaged as CTAS I and II in the emergency department of a tertiary care center in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in the emergency department of a tertiary healthcare center, National Guard Health Affairs, in Jeddah. The study provides a comprehensive assessment of factors (including length of stay) and outcomes for a total of 505 critically ill patients (CTAS Levels I and II) who presented to the emergency department from January 2023 to December 2023. Results: A total of 505 patients were included in this study, out of which 325 (64.4%) were males. The most reported co-morbidities were diabetes mellitus 169 (33.5%) and Hypertension 173 (34.3%). The majority of 435 patients (86.1%) were CTAS level 2, while 70 (13.9%) were CTAS 1. The mean ED length of stay was 5.5 hours.347 out of 505 patients required hospitalization (68.7%), and the mean of hospitalization by days was 13 (±23.5%). 8.5% of these patients died of which14.3%were CTAS 1, and 7.6% were CTAS2. Conclusion: As demonstrated above, most critical ED cases were comprised of males; this trend may be attributed to higher health risks among them. Furthermore, most critical ED visits were related to cardiac issues, with shortness of breath being the most reported symptom. The mortality rate for these ED patients was 8.5%. Additionally, the average length of stay (LOS) in ED was 5.5 hours. Other studies have demonstrated that this is associated with a lower mortality rate compared to others with longer LOS.
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.