Blood pressure measurements on children in the emergency department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on routine blood pressure (BP) measurement for children presenting to the ED. By contrast, BP measurements are performed routinely in adult ED. With increasing childhood obesity, and the knowledge that elevated BP in childhood correlates with hypertension in adulthood, routine BP measurement in children should be considered. OBJECTIVE: To review the current practice of BP measurement in children presenting to the ED of Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Perth, Western Australia, a tertiary referral paediatric centre. METHOD: A prospective observational study of 504 children presenting to the ED over a 6 month period in 2003. RESULTS: In total, 114 children (22.6%) had their BP measured. A total of 35 (30.7%) had a BP above the 95th percentile for age and sex. In total, 19 (54.3%) of 35 with abnormal BP had their BP remeasured. Only one child of 10 with consecutive hypertensive measurements was followed up. BP measurement was more common in children aged 2 years and above, and in higher triage category patients. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that BP measurement in the ED is both relatively infrequent and inconsistent. Further research into this area is required to determine the usefulness and feasibility of routine BP measurements in children presenting to the ED. This might improve the quality of health care and positively impact on public health for the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".