↓ Skip to main content

Validation of the modified Japanese Triage and Acuity Scale-based triage system emphasizing the physiologic variables or mechanism of injuries

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Emergency Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of the modified Japanese Triage and Acuity Scale-based triage system emphasizing the physiologic variables or mechanism of injuries
Published in
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12245-015-0097-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiraku Funakoshi, Takashi Shiga, Yosuke Homma, Yoshiyuki Nakashima, Jin Takahashi, Hiroshi Kamura, Masatomi Ikusaka

Abstract

The Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale is a valid triage system. The system was translated and implemented in the Japanese emergency departments (EDs) from 2012. This system was named the Japanese Triage and Acuity Scale; however, the validation studies of the Japanese Triage and Acuity Scale have been limited. In addition, for a patient with multiple complaints, it could become challenging, due to its requirement of a single complaint. Therefore, we hypothesized that a modified version of the Japanese Triage and Acuity Scale using first-order modifiers without chief complaint detection is accurate. A retrospective cohort study evaluated a correlation between the modified triage scale level and outcomes of all adult emergency department patients at a Japanese hospital. Construct validity of the modified triage scale level was assessed based on comparisons of total admission rate (including hospitalizations, emergency department deaths) and length of stay between triage levels. The distributions of five levels of the triage scale (level 1 is the most urgent) among the 17,121 cases are as follows: 1:451, 2:1148, 3:7703, 4:7652, and 5:167. Total admission rates by each level were 1:89.8, 2:68.2, 3:26.4, 4:6.6, and 5:0.6 %, which progressively increased from level 5 to 1 and were significant (p < 0.01). Compared with patients in level 3, the odds of total admission rates were 14.4, 5.1, 0.27, and 0.030 for the patients in levels 1, 2, 4, and 5. The length of stay was longer in the patients with the more urgent levels except for those with level 1. The modified version of the Japanese Triage and Acuity Scale is a valid predictor of total admission and length of stay and may enable the nurses to triage patients without detecting the chief complaints.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Mexico 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 33 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 31%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 17%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Computer Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 February 2016.
All research outputs
#3,436,910
of 7,216,446 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#170
of 258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,996
of 283,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,216,446 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 258 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.