MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294876973 · doi:10.1186/s12887-022-03555-0

Escalation of care in children at high risk of clinical deterioration in a tertiary care children’s hospital using the Bedside Pediatric Early Warning System

2022· article· en· W4294876973 on OpenAlexaff
Orsola Gawronski, Jos Maria Latour, Corrado Cecchetti, Angela Iula, Lucilla Ravà, Marta Luisa Ciofi degli Atti, Immacolata Dall’Oglio, Emanuela Tiozzo, Massimiliano Raponi, Christopher S. Parshuram

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pediatrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersMinistero della SaluteOspedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù
KeywordsMedicineEarly warning scoreLogistic regressionEmergency medicinePediatric intensive care unitPediatricsCohortObservational studyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Escalation and de-escalation are a routine part of high-quality care that should be matched with clinical needs. The aim of this study was to describe escalation of care in relation to the occurrence and timing of Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) admission in a cohort of pediatric inpatients with acute worsening of their clinical condition. METHODS: A monocentric, observational cohort study was performed from January to December 2018. Eligible patients were children: 1) admitted to one of the inpatient wards other than ICU; 2) under the age of 18 years at the time of admission; 3) with two or more Bedside-Paediatric-Early-Warning-System (BedsidePEWS) scores ≥ 7 recorded at a distance of at least one hour and for a period of 4 h during admission. The main outcome -the 24-h disposition - was defined as admission to PICU within 24-h of enrolment or staying in the inpatient ward. Escalation of care was measured using an eight-point scale-the Escalation Index (EI), developed by the authors. The EI was calculated every 6 h, starting from the moment the patient was considered eligible. Analyses used multivariate quantile and logistic regression models. RESULTS: The 228 episodes included 574 EI calculated scores. The 24-h disposition was the ward in 129 (57%) and the PICU in 99 (43%) episodes. Patients who were admitted to PICU within 24-h had higher top EI scores [median (IQR) 6 (5-7) vs 4 (3-5), p < 0.001]; higher initial BedsidePEWS scores [median (IQR) 10(8-13) vs. 9 (8-11), p = 0.02], were less likely to have a chronic disease [n = 62 (63%) vs. n = 127 (98%), p < 0.0001], and were rated by physicians as being at a higher risk of having a cardiac arrest (p = 0.01) than patients remaining on the ward. The EI increased over 24 h before urgent admission to PICU or cardiac arrest by 0.53 every 6-h interval (CI 0.37-0.70, p < 0.001), while it decreased by 0.25 every 6-h interval (CI -0.36-0.15, p < 0.001) in patients who stayed on the wards. CONCLUSION: Escalation of care was related to temporal changes in severity of illness, patient background and environmental factors. The EI index can improve responses to evolving critical illness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PediatricsSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207