Prognostic Value of the pSOFA Score for Mortality Among Critical Ill Children Admitted to Pediatric Intensive Care Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of the pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (pSOFA) for mortality among critically ill patients in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) and to compare with Pediatric Risk of Mortality version III (PRISM III), Pediatric Index of Mortality version 3 (PIM-3), and Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction version 2 (PELOD-2) scores in predicting mortality in severe pediatric patients. Methods: This prospective descriptive study enrolled patients aged from 1 month to 15 years old admitted to the PICU of Vietnam National Children's Hospital from April 2023 to October 2023. Clinical and laboratory variables were recorded at the time of admission. pSOFA, PRISM III, PIM-3, and PELOD-2 scores were calculated, and treatment outcomes were recorded. Results: pSOFA score demonstrated excellent prognostic capability for mortality in the PICU with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.928 (p < 0.05); at a cut-off score of 12, the sensitivity was 88.5% and specificity was 87.6%. pSOFA score was directly proportional to the predicted mortality, reflecting the actual mortality rate of the study population across various patient groups and disease models. Compared to PRISM III, PIM-3, and PELOD-2 scores, pSOFA exhibited superior predictive power for mortality, with more accurate mortality predictions relative to actual rates and a higher ability to differentiate between survival and mortality groups. Conclusion: pSOFA score is highly effective for predicting mortality in critically ill pediatric patients and provides more accurate predictions than PRISM III, PIM-3, and PELOD-2 scores.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".