Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1111/acem.12814

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/acem.12814
suck pdf from google scholar
C4639443!4639443!26474032
unlimited free pdf from europmc26474032    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi


Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
pmid26474032      Acad+Emerg+Med 2015 ; 22 (11): 1298-306
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Comparison of Two Sepsis Recognition Methods in a Pediatric Emergency Department #MMPMID26474032
  • Balamuth F; Alpern ER; Grundmeier RW; Chilutti M; Weiss SL; Fitzgerald JC; Hayes K; Bilker W; Lautenbach E
  • Acad Emerg Med 2015[Nov]; 22 (11): 1298-306 PMID26474032show ga
  • Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of physician judgment and an electronic algorithmic alert to identify pediatric patients with severe sepsis/septic shock in a pediatric emergency department (ED). Methods: This was an observational cohort study of patients older than 56 days with fever or hypothermia. All patients were evaluated for potential sepsis in real time by the ED clinical team. An electronic algorithmic alert was retrospectively applied to identify patients with potential sepsis independent of physician judgment. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients correctly identified with severe sepsis/septic shock defined by consensus criteria. Test characteristics were determined and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were compared. Results: Of 19,524 eligible patient visits, 88 patients developed consensus-confirmed severe sepsis or septic shock. Physician judgment identified 159, and the algorithmic alert identified 3,301 patients with potential sepsis. Physician judgment had sensitivity of 72.7% (95% CI = 72.1% to 73.4%) and specificity 99.5% (95% CI = 99.4% to 99.6%); the algorithmic alert had sensitivity 92.1% (95% CI = 91.7% to 92.4%), and specificity 83.4% (95% CI = 82.9% to 83.9%) for severe sepsis/septic shock. There was no significant difference in the area under the ROC curve for physician judgment (0.86, 95% CI = 0.81 to 0.91) or the algorithm (0.88, 95% CI = 0.85 to 0.91; p = 0.54). A combination method using either positive physician judgment or an algorithmic alert improved sensitivity to 96.6% and specificity to 83.3%. A sequential approach, in which positive identification by the algorithmic alert was then confirmed by physician judgment, achieved 68.2% sensitivity and 99.6% specificity. Positive and negative predictive values for physician judgment vs. algorithmic alert were 40.3% vs. 2.5% and 99.88 % vs. 99.96%, respectively. Conclusions: The electronic algorithmic alert was more sensitive but less specific than physician judgment for recognition of pediatric severe sepsis and septic shock. These findings can help to guide institutions in selecting pediatric sepsis recognition methods based on institutional needs and priorities.
  • ä


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box