Mortality predictors in pediatric emergency department presentations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Mohammed Alsabri, Mohamed A ELKarargy, Israa Magdy Ata, Mostafa A Khalifa, Abdulrahman Khaldoon Hamid, Ahmed Bostamy Elsnhory, Omar Ahmed Abdelwahab, Sarah Urbon
{"title":"Mortality predictors in pediatric emergency department presentations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mohammed Alsabri, Mohamed A ELKarargy, Israa Magdy Ata, Mostafa A Khalifa, Abdulrahman Khaldoon Hamid, Ahmed Bostamy Elsnhory, Omar Ahmed Abdelwahab, Sarah Urbon","doi":"10.1186/s12873-025-01347-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pediatric patients present to the emergency departments (EDs) with a wide range of clinical manifestations, ranging from mild to severe. A systematic approach is crucial to identify those at high risk of deterioration. However, the predictive value of such predictors remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our study aims to evaluate different mortality predictors used in pediatric emergency departments (PEDs) regarding the diagnostic accuracy metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We comprehensively searched multiple databases and included all cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized controlled trials from January 2000 to December 2024 with pediatric patients (aged 0-18 years) presenting to PEDs, where mortality predictors were used to assess for in-ED and short-term post-ED mortality. We employed a bivariate random-effects model for data synthesis and analysis to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>329 Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS) thresholds were analyzed, with the model-derived optimal cutoff 2.189 (AUC) = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.76), high pooled sensitivity (0.95, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.80) and specificity (0.93, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.80). In addition, A strong negative predictive value (NPV = 0.0006) and modest positive predictive value (PPV = 0.0003) were noted. Heterogeneity was significant (I²>99%), driven by PEWS versions and clinical settings. PEWS implementation reduced mortality without increasing ICU admissions in resource-limited settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PEWS is a good exclusion tool for those at low mortality risk. However, a comprehensive approach with clinical judgment is needed for the risk assessment of high-risk pediatrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":"25 1","pages":"188"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12465593/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-025-01347-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pediatric patients present to the emergency departments (EDs) with a wide range of clinical manifestations, ranging from mild to severe. A systematic approach is crucial to identify those at high risk of deterioration. However, the predictive value of such predictors remains unclear.

Objectives: Our study aims to evaluate different mortality predictors used in pediatric emergency departments (PEDs) regarding the diagnostic accuracy metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio.

Methods: We comprehensively searched multiple databases and included all cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized controlled trials from January 2000 to December 2024 with pediatric patients (aged 0-18 years) presenting to PEDs, where mortality predictors were used to assess for in-ED and short-term post-ED mortality. We employed a bivariate random-effects model for data synthesis and analysis to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) values.

Results: 329 Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS) thresholds were analyzed, with the model-derived optimal cutoff 2.189 (AUC) = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.76), high pooled sensitivity (0.95, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.80) and specificity (0.93, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.80). In addition, A strong negative predictive value (NPV = 0.0006) and modest positive predictive value (PPV = 0.0003) were noted. Heterogeneity was significant (I²>99%), driven by PEWS versions and clinical settings. PEWS implementation reduced mortality without increasing ICU admissions in resource-limited settings.

Conclusions: PEWS is a good exclusion tool for those at low mortality risk. However, a comprehensive approach with clinical judgment is needed for the risk assessment of high-risk pediatrics.

儿科急诊科报告的死亡率预测因素:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:儿科患者出现在急诊科(EDs)的临床表现范围广泛,从轻度到重度不等。一种系统的方法对于确定那些有严重恶化风险的人至关重要。然而,这些预测因子的预测价值尚不清楚。目的:本研究旨在评估儿科急诊科(PEDs)中使用的不同死亡率预测因子的诊断准确性指标,包括敏感性、特异性和诊断优势比。方法:我们全面检索了多个数据库,包括2000年1月至2024年12月期间所有的队列研究、病例对照研究和随机对照试验,其中包括儿科患者(0-18岁),其中死亡率预测因子用于评估急诊科内和急诊科后短期死亡率。我们采用双变量随机效应模型进行数据合成和分析,计算合并敏感性、特异性、诊断优势比(DOR)和曲线下面积(AUC)值。结果:共分析了329个儿科早期预警评分(PEWS)阈值,模型导出的最佳截止值为2.189 (AUC) = 0.70;95% CI: 0.63至0.76),高综合敏感性(0.95,95% CI: 0.72至0.80)和特异性(0.93,95% CI: 0.62至0.80)。此外,有很强的阴性预测值(NPV = 0.0006)和适度的阳性预测值(PPV = 0.0003)。异质性显著(I²bbb99 %),由PEWS版本和临床环境驱动。在资源有限的情况下,PEWS的实施降低了死亡率,而没有增加ICU的入院率。结论:PEWS是低死亡风险患者的良好排除工具。然而,高危儿科的风险评估需要综合的方法和临床判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Emergency Medicine
BMC Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信