Reliability of vital signs measured at triage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of vital signs measured at triage in the emergency department. METHODS: The vital signs of all consenting ambulatory patients 16 years old and above presenting at triage were measured by the duty triage nurse as standard practice and then repeated by a single, blinded, trained observer within 2 min of the initial assessment using the same (manual or electronic) methods. The results were analysed using paired sample t-tests. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the repeated electronic measurement of oxygen saturation [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.30-0.46, P=0.687] or repeated manual measurement of respiratory rate (95% CI -1.04-1.76, P=0.613). A statistically but not clinically significant difference of 2.43 bpm was found in the repeated electronic measurement of heart rate (95% CI 0.52-4.33, P=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: The manual and electronic measurements of vital signs at triage appear to be reliable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".