MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3177125045 · doi:10.22037/aaem.v9i1.1237

Validation of Songklanagarind Pediatric Triage Model in the Emergency Department; a Cross-Sectional Study.

2021· article· en· W3177125045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Siriwimon Tantarattanapong, Nut Chonwanich, Wannipha Senuphai

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageMedicineEmergency departmentObservational studyPediatric emergency medicineEmergency medicineMedical emergencyPediatric traumaPoison controlInjury preventionEmergency physicianNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: An effective triage needs to consider many factors, such as good triage protocol, experienced triage nurses, and patient factors. This study aimed to evaluate the validity of Songklanagarind Pediatric Triage (SPT) for triage of pediatric patients in the emergency department (ED) and identify the factors associated with triage appropriateness. METHODS: This study was done in two phases. In the first phase, a team of emergency physicians, a pediatric emergency physician, and a pediatric critical care physician developed SPT model by considering and combining Emergency Severity Index (ESI), Pediatric Assessment Triangle (PAT), Pediatric Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (PaedCTAS), and Pediatric Septic Shock early warning signs protocol of the hospital as the core concept. In the second phase, a prospective observational study was conducted in the ED of Songklanagarind Hospital, which is a tertiary university hospital in southern Thailand, from September to October 2019 to evaluate the accuracy of the developed triage model. RESULTS: A total of 520 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. The pediatric triage model had sensitivity and specificity values of 98.28% and 26.24%, respectively, and positive and negative predictive values of 27.67% and 98.15%, respectively, in prediction of death, hospitalization, and resource utilization. The rates of appropriate triage, over-triage, and under-triage were 68.8%, 28.5%, and 2.7%, respectively. Significant factors associated with appropriateness of triage were underlying disease of the respiratory system (OR = 4.16, 95%CI: 1.75‒9.23), fever (OR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.41‒0.88), dyspnea (OR: 6.38, 95%CI: 2.51‒16.22), diarrhea (OR = 0.26, 95%CI: 0.09‒0.73), oxygen saturation <95% (OR = 3.18, 95%CI: 1.09‒9.27), accessory muscle use during breathing (OR = 3.67, 95%CI: 1.09‒12.41), and wheezing or rhonchi (OR = 6.96, 95%CI: 3.14‒15.43). CONCLUSION: SPT showed good correlation of hospital admission rates and resource utilization with pediatric triage level of urgency. However, further efforts are needed to decrease the rates of over- and under-triage.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.319
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicEmergency and Acute Care Studies→French-language works237,207→