↓ Skip to main content

Designing a Pediatric Severe Sepsis Screening Tool

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Designing a Pediatric Severe Sepsis Screening Tool
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fped.2014.00056
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert J. Sepanski, Sandip A. Godambe, Christopher D. Mangum, Christine S. Bovat, Arno L. Zaritsky, Samir H. Shah

Abstract

We sought to create a screening tool with improved predictive value for pediatric severe sepsis (SS) and septic shock that can be incorporated into the electronic medical record and actively screen all patients arriving at a pediatric emergency department (ED). "Gold standard" SS cases were identified using a combination of coded discharge diagnosis and physician chart review from 7,402 children who visited a pediatric ED over 2 months. The tool's identification of SS was initially based on International Consensus Conference on Pediatric Sepsis (ICCPS) parameters that were refined by an iterative, virtual process that allowed us to propose successive changes in sepsis detection parameters in order to optimize the tool's predictive value based on receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Age-specific normal and abnormal values for heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) were empirically derived from 143,603 children seen in a second pediatric ED over 3 years. Univariate analyses were performed for each measure in the tool to assess its association with SS and to characterize it as an "early" or "late" indicator of SS. A split-sample was used to validate the final, optimized tool. The final tool incorporated age-specific thresholds for abnormal HR and RR and employed a linear temperature correction for each category. The final tool's positive predictive value was 48.7%, a significant, nearly threefold improvement over the original ICCPS tool. False positive systemic inflammatory response syndrome identifications were nearly sixfold lower.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Unknown 107 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Master 12 11%
Other 11 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 25 23%
Unknown 24 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Computer Science 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 25 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 July 2014.
All research outputs
#7,205,227
of 23,666,535 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,282
of 6,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,566
of 207,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#9
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,666,535 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
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 207,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.