ArticleBMJ open quality2026
qREDS score compared with the REDS and NEWS2 scores to risk-stratify emergency department suspected sepsis patients for in-hospital mortality and 168-hour survival probability: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 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
backgroundThe Risk-stratification of Emergency Department suspected Sepsis (REDS) score requires external validation. The six dichotomous variables and lactate can be accurately extracted electronically unlike refractory hypotension (RH), where the recording of the fluid-bolus and blood pressure measurement may be inaccurate. The impact of excluding RH is not known.
objectivesTo develop the quick-REDS (qREDS) score, by removing RH from the REDS score and to validate its prognostic performance in comparison to the original score and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS)2 score, for all-cause in-hospital mortality and 168-hour survival probability (SP).
methodsVital signs, blood results, outcome at 168 hours and at discharge, were extracted from the electronic records of emergency department (ED) adults admitted after intravenous antibiotics for an infection. The REDS, qREDS and NEWS2 scores were calculated, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves constructed for in-hospital all-cause mortality, the area under the ROC (AUROC) curves compared and cut-off points noted. Test-characteristics at cut-off points ≥1, ≥3, ≥5 and ≥7 were studied. Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves were constructed for all the scores for SP at 168 hours for score bands 0-2, 3-4 and ≥5.
resultsOf 3202 patients, 433 died in hospital and 209 died at 168 hours. AUROC curve: REDS 0.74 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.75) and qREDS 0.73 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.75); both greater than NEWS2 0.66 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.68); p<0.0001. Cut-off points: REDS ≥3, qREDS ≥3 and NEWS2 ≥6. Specificity for in-hospital mortality of score ≥5; REDS 89.2% (95% CI 88.0% to 90.3%), qREDS 90.6% (95% CI 89.4% to 91.6%) and NEWS2 43.9% (95% CI 42.1% to 45.8%). All KM curves were significant, log-rank test p<0.0001. SP at 168 hours: whole population 93.4% (SE 0.4); SP at ≥5points: REDS 78.3% (SE 1.2), qREDS 78.0% (SE 2.0) and NEWS2 90.6% (SE 0.7). SP trends were similar at 24, 48 and 72 hours.
conclusionqREDS is a valid surrogate for the REDS score and had significantly better prognostic performance than the NEWS2 score for in-hospital mortality and 168-hour survival probability, in ED patients with suspected sepsis.
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.