MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387712596 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20210337

Readiness of emergency departments for pediatric patients and pediatric mortality: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4387712596 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jessica A. Harper, Amanda C. Coyle, Clara Tam, Megan Skakum, Mirna Ragheb, Lucy Wilson, Mê‐Linh Lê, Terry P. Klassen, Alex Aregbesola

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare InnovationUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalQuartileCINAHLMeta-analysisOdds ratioCochrane LibraryMEDLINEEmergency departmentEmergency medicinePediatricsInternal medicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Most children who need emergency care visit general emergency departments and urgent care centres; the weighted pediatric readiness score (WPRS) is currently used to evaluate emergency departments’ readiness for pediatric patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether a higher WPRS was associated with decreased mortality and improved health care outcomes and utilization. <h3>Methods:</h3> We conducted a systematic review of cohort and cross-sectional studies on emergency departments that care for children (age ≤ 21 yr). We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Library (Wiley), CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (Ovid) and Scopus from inception until July 29, 2022. Articles identified were screened for inclusion by 2 independent reviewers. The primary outcome was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were health care outcomes and utilization. We used the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale to assess for quality and bias of the included studies. The <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic was calculated to quantify study heterogeneity. <h3>Results:</h3> We identified 1789 articles. Eight articles were included in the final analysis. Three studies showed an inverse association between highest WPRS quartile and pediatric mortality (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 0.78; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 89%, low certainty of evidence) in random-effects meta-analysis. Likewise, 1 study not included in the meta-analysis also reported an inverse association with a 1-point increase in WPRS (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.98). One study reported that the highest WPRS quartile was associated with shorter length of stay in hospital (β −0.36 days, 95% CI −0.61 to −0.10). Three studies concluded that the highest WPRS quartile was associated with fewer interfacility transfers. The certainty of evidence is low for mortality and moderate for the studied health care outcomes and utilization. <h3>Interpretation:</h3> The data suggest a potential inverse association between the WPRS of emergency departments and mortality risk in children. More studies are needed to refute or confirm these findings. <h3>Protocol registration:</h3> PROSPERO-CRD42020191149.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207