Ramathibodi中毒中心评分系统的开发和验证,以预测住院患者的随访必要性:一项回顾性研究。

IF 3.3
Kitisak Sanprasert, Satariya Trakulsrichai, Phantakan Tansuwannarat, Panee Rittilert, Achara Tongpoo
{"title":"Ramathibodi中毒中心评分系统的开发和验证,以预测住院患者的随访必要性:一项回顾性研究。","authors":"Kitisak Sanprasert, Satariya Trakulsrichai, Phantakan Tansuwannarat, Panee Rittilert, Achara Tongpoo","doi":"10.1080/15563650.2026.2691830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Ramathibodi Poison Center manages a substantial workload of 30,000-40,000 annual inquiries, placing significant strain on limited human resources. We aim to develop and validate a practical risk assessment score (Ramathibodi Poison Score) to predict in-hospital mortality among hospitalized poisoned patients, thereby facilitating evidence-based patient prioritization and resource allocation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study used a 9-year dataset partitioned into derivation cohort (70%) and internal validation cohort (30%), while a subsequent 1-year dataset (2025) served for temporal validation. Predictors were identified using multivariable logistic regression, and coefficients were transformed into a simplified integer-based score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 105,342 cases were included in the primary analysis, with 5,578 cases for temporal validation. Independent predictors of mortality included pesticide exposure (the strongest predictor), unknown toxic substance, undetermined or intentional exposure, advanced age (>60 years), and male sex. The score demonstrated robust discrimination with AUC values of 0.828 (derivation), 0.831 (internal), and 0.753 (temporal). Calibration yielded an observed-to-expected (O:E) ratio of 1.000 in the derivation cohort, whereas initial temporal validation demonstrated an underestimation of mortality (O:E 1.528) due to shifting epidemiology. Following logistic recalibration, the O:E ratio in the temporal cohort was 1.000. The score stratified patients from low risk (score 0-5; 0.62% mortality, negative predictive value (NPV) 99.4%) to high risk (score ≥15; 22.22% mortality).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The score addresses existing severity score limitations by stratifying risk before clinical deterioration. The robust NPV at the low-risk threshold confirms the safety of on-demand surveillance. Furthermore, initial temporal miscalibration highlights the dynamic nature of toxicology, emphasizing the need for periodic local recalibration against emerging threats.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Ramathibodi Poison Score utilizes simple variables to predict mortality with robust discrimination. It safely identifies low-risk patients for de-escalated surveillance. With necessary periodic recalibration, it provides a dynamic, evidence-based framework for efficient resource allocation as an adjunct to clinical judgment.</p>","PeriodicalId":520593,"journal":{"name":"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and validation of a Ramathibodi Poison Center scoring system to predict follow-up necessity in hospitalized patients: a retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Kitisak Sanprasert, Satariya Trakulsrichai, Phantakan Tansuwannarat, Panee Rittilert, Achara Tongpoo\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15563650.2026.2691830\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Ramathibodi Poison Center manages a substantial workload of 30,000-40,000 annual inquiries, placing significant strain on limited human resources. We aim to develop and validate a practical risk assessment score (Ramathibodi Poison Score) to predict in-hospital mortality among hospitalized poisoned patients, thereby facilitating evidence-based patient prioritization and resource allocation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study used a 9-year dataset partitioned into derivation cohort (70%) and internal validation cohort (30%), while a subsequent 1-year dataset (2025) served for temporal validation. Predictors were identified using multivariable logistic regression, and coefficients were transformed into a simplified integer-based score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 105,342 cases were included in the primary analysis, with 5,578 cases for temporal validation. Independent predictors of mortality included pesticide exposure (the strongest predictor), unknown toxic substance, undetermined or intentional exposure, advanced age (>60 years), and male sex. The score demonstrated robust discrimination with AUC values of 0.828 (derivation), 0.831 (internal), and 0.753 (temporal). Calibration yielded an observed-to-expected (O:E) ratio of 1.000 in the derivation cohort, whereas initial temporal validation demonstrated an underestimation of mortality (O:E 1.528) due to shifting epidemiology. Following logistic recalibration, the O:E ratio in the temporal cohort was 1.000. The score stratified patients from low risk (score 0-5; 0.62% mortality, negative predictive value (NPV) 99.4%) to high risk (score ≥15; 22.22% mortality).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The score addresses existing severity score limitations by stratifying risk before clinical deterioration. The robust NPV at the low-risk threshold confirms the safety of on-demand surveillance. Furthermore, initial temporal miscalibration highlights the dynamic nature of toxicology, emphasizing the need for periodic local recalibration against emerging threats.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Ramathibodi Poison Score utilizes simple variables to predict mortality with robust discrimination. It safely identifies low-risk patients for de-escalated surveillance. With necessary periodic recalibration, it provides a dynamic, evidence-based framework for efficient resource allocation as an adjunct to clinical judgment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2026.2691830\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2026.2691830","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:Ramathibodi毒药中心每年要处理3万到4万份咨询的大量工作量,给有限的人力资源带来了巨大的压力。我们的目标是开发和验证一种实用的风险评估评分(Ramathibodi中毒评分),以预测住院中毒患者的住院死亡率,从而促进基于证据的患者优先排序和资源分配。方法:回顾性研究使用了一个9年的数据集,分为衍生队列(70%)和内部验证队列(30%),而随后的1年数据集(2025)用于时间验证。使用多变量逻辑回归确定预测因子,并将系数转换为简化的基于整数的评分。结果:初步分析共纳入105342例,其中5578例进行时间验证。死亡率的独立预测因子包括农药暴露(最强预测因子)、未知有毒物质、未确定或故意暴露、高龄(60岁以上)和男性。AUC值分别为0.828(推导)、0.831(内部)和0.753(时间)。在衍生队列中,校准产生了观察到的期望比(O:E)为1.000,而初始时间验证显示,由于流行病学的变化,低估了死亡率(O:E 1.528)。经过logistic重新校准后,时间队列的O:E比值为1.000。该评分将患者从低危(评分0-5分;死亡率0.62%,阴性预测值(NPV) 99.4%)到高危(评分≥15分;死亡率22.22%)进行分层。讨论:该评分通过对临床恶化前的风险进行分层,解决了现有严重程度评分的局限性。低风险阈值下的稳健净现值证实了按需监测的安全性。此外,最初的时间错误校准突出了毒理学的动态性质,强调需要针对新出现的威胁进行定期的局部重新校准。结论:Ramathibodi中毒评分采用简单的变量预测死亡率,判别性强。它可以安全地识别低风险患者,进行降级监测。通过必要的定期重新校准,它为有效的资源分配提供了一个动态的、基于证据的框架,作为临床判断的辅助手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development and validation of a Ramathibodi Poison Center scoring system to predict follow-up necessity in hospitalized patients: a retrospective study.

Introduction: The Ramathibodi Poison Center manages a substantial workload of 30,000-40,000 annual inquiries, placing significant strain on limited human resources. We aim to develop and validate a practical risk assessment score (Ramathibodi Poison Score) to predict in-hospital mortality among hospitalized poisoned patients, thereby facilitating evidence-based patient prioritization and resource allocation.

Methods: A retrospective study used a 9-year dataset partitioned into derivation cohort (70%) and internal validation cohort (30%), while a subsequent 1-year dataset (2025) served for temporal validation. Predictors were identified using multivariable logistic regression, and coefficients were transformed into a simplified integer-based score.

Results: A total of 105,342 cases were included in the primary analysis, with 5,578 cases for temporal validation. Independent predictors of mortality included pesticide exposure (the strongest predictor), unknown toxic substance, undetermined or intentional exposure, advanced age (>60 years), and male sex. The score demonstrated robust discrimination with AUC values of 0.828 (derivation), 0.831 (internal), and 0.753 (temporal). Calibration yielded an observed-to-expected (O:E) ratio of 1.000 in the derivation cohort, whereas initial temporal validation demonstrated an underestimation of mortality (O:E 1.528) due to shifting epidemiology. Following logistic recalibration, the O:E ratio in the temporal cohort was 1.000. The score stratified patients from low risk (score 0-5; 0.62% mortality, negative predictive value (NPV) 99.4%) to high risk (score ≥15; 22.22% mortality).

Discussion: The score addresses existing severity score limitations by stratifying risk before clinical deterioration. The robust NPV at the low-risk threshold confirms the safety of on-demand surveillance. Furthermore, initial temporal miscalibration highlights the dynamic nature of toxicology, emphasizing the need for periodic local recalibration against emerging threats.

Conclusion: The Ramathibodi Poison Score utilizes simple variables to predict mortality with robust discrimination. It safely identifies low-risk patients for de-escalated surveillance. With necessary periodic recalibration, it provides a dynamic, evidence-based framework for efficient resource allocation as an adjunct to clinical judgment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书