ArticleCJEM2026
Emergency medicine triage practices across Canadian hospitals: a national survey.
Article in CJEM, 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
objectivesTriage in emergency departments (EDs) prioritizes patient care when demand exceeds resources. In Canada, the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) is the nationally endorsed system used to guide triage decisions. Despite longstanding advocacy for standardized practices, implementation and training requirements vary across hospitals, and electronic decision-support tools have been increasingly integrated to support triage. This study aimed to describe current triage practices, staffing, and training across Canadian EDs.
methodsWe conducted a national, bilingual cross-sectional survey of ED staff across 10 provinces and three territories. A 21-item electronic questionnaire, developed by a multidisciplinary team, captured data on triage roles, training, tools, and protocols. Surveys were distributed via provincial and local ED leads, with follow-up reminders to maximize participation. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics and reported as counts and percentages. The survey was conducted in accordance with the Kelley checklist.
resultsA total of 1169 surveys were completed, mostly in English, from ten provinces and two territories with Ontario and Alberta being overrepresented. Respondents were predominantly registered nurses (79.1%) responsible for triage (99.1%), with most having more than 2 years of triage experience in addition to prior nursing experience (86.1%). The majority reported using the 2016 CTAS guidelines (54.8%) and electronic CTAS (53.9%). Most sites had minimum training requirements for triage staff (74.7%), with 91.4% of respondents having completed the NENA/CAEP CTAS participant course. Considerable variability existed in guideline awareness, training requirements, and triage practices.
conclusionTriage in Canadian EDs is predominantly performed by registered nurses with more than two years of triage experience, most of whom have completed formal CTAS training. Despite widespread guideline use and decision-support tools, practices remain inconsistent, underscoring the need for standardized training and implementation strategies to ensure safe, effective, and reliable triage across the country.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42603837What 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.