MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2763619997 · doi:10.1093/pch/9.suppl_a.27a

26 Predictors of Failure to Measure Vital Signs at Triage in a Pediatric Emergency Department

2004· article· en· W2763619997 on OpenAlexaff
Jocelyn Gravel, Serge Gouin, Lucie Opatrny

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTriageVital signsEmergency departmentLogistic regressionRespiratory rateEmergency medicineHeart rateProspective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)Missing dataBlood pressureCohort studyPediatricsInternal medicineSurgeryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vital signs measurement is considered standard in pediatric emergency department triage assessment but studies have shown a variable incidence of missing data. The aim of this study was to determine clinical and environmental factors associated with missing data for vital signs at triage. A prospective cohort study was conducted in a pediatric tertiary center ED. From November 1st, 2000 to October 31st, 2001, three periods of 8 hours were randomly chosen monthly. During these periods, all patients triaged to the ED were evaluated. Demographic and clinical data were collected by a single investigator not involved in the care of the patients. Nurses and physicians were blinded of the study objective. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed in order to evaluate determinants of missing data for heart rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure, or pulse oximetry. There were 2081 patients triaged and during the study periods. There was a missing data for heart rate for 921 (42%) patients. The missing data rate was of 60% for respiratory rate, of 69% for blood pressure and of 74% for pulse oxymetry. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, independent clinical predictors of missing data for heart rate measurement at triage included: age (per year) OR=0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.96), triage level (from 1=priority to 4=non-urgent) OR=2.11 (95% CI: 1.64, 2.42), being asthmatic OR=0.29 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.52). Shift of presentation was also independently associated with the risk of missing data for heart rate: using night as reference, day shift OR=1.47 (95% CI: 1.06, 2.04) and evening OR=2.89 (95% CI: 2.10, 4.00). Decreased level of consciousness, immunocompromized state, and dependence on a medical device did not meet significance. Results were similar when analysis were repeated for respiratory rate, blood pressure and pulse oximetry. Factors related to patient's clinical characteristics such as age, acuity of triage level and presence of asthma, were associated with a higher rate of vital signs measurement at triage. An environmental factor, shift of presentation, is also independently associated.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicEmergency and Acute Care Studies→French-language works237,207→