Mohammed Alsabri, Mohamed A ELKarargy, Israa Magdy Ata, Mostafa A Khalifa, Abdulrahman Khaldoon Hamid, Ahmed Bostamy Elsnhory, Omar Ahmed Abdelwahab, Sarah Urbon
{"title":"儿科急诊科报告的死亡率预测因素:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Mortality predictors in pediatric emergency department presentations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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.
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.