↓ Skip to main content

The formation and design of the TRIAGE study - baseline data on 6005 consecutive patients admitted to hospital from the emergency department

Overview of attention for article published in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
The formation and design of the TRIAGE study - baseline data on 6005 consecutive patients admitted to hospital from the emergency department
Published in
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13049-015-0184-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louis Lind Plesner, Anne Kristine Servais Iversen, Sandra Langkjær, Ture Lange Nielsen, Rebecca Østervig, Peder Emil Warming, Idrees Ahmad Salam, Michael Kristensen, Morten Schou, Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Jakob Lundager Forberg, Lars Køber, Lars S. Rasmussen, György Sölétormos, Bente Klarlund Pedersen, Kasper Iversen

Abstract

Patient crowding in emergency departments (ED) is a common challenge and associated with worsened outcome for the patients. Previous studies on biomarkers in the ED setting has focused on identification of high risk patients, and and the ability to use biomarkers to identify low-risk patients has only been sparsely examined. The broader aims of the TRIAGE study are to develop methods to identify low-risk patients appropriate for early ED discharge by combining information from a wide range of new inflammatory biomarkers and vital signs, the present baseline article aims to describe the formation of the TRIAGE database and characteristize the included patients. We included consecutive patients ≥ 17 years admitted to hospital after triage staging in the ED. Blood samples for a biobank were collected and plasma stored in a freezer (-80 °C). Triage was done by a trained nurse using the Danish Emergency Proces Triage (DEPT) which categorizes patients as green (not urgent), yellow (urgent), orange (emergent) or red (rescusitation). Presenting complaints, admission diagnoses, comorbidities, length of stay, and 'events' during admission (any of 20 predefined definitive treatments that necessitates in-hospital care), vital signs and routine laboratory tests taken in the ED were aslo included in the database. Between September 5(th) 2013 and December 6(th) 2013, 6005 patients were included in the database and the biobank (94.1 % of all admissions). Of these, 1978 (32.9 %) were categorized as green, 2386 (39.7 %) yellow, 1616 (26.9 %) orange and 25 (0.4 %) red. Median age was 62 years (IQR 46-76), 49.8 % were male and median length of stay was 1 day (IQR 0-4). No events were found in 2658 (44.2 %) and 158 (2.6 %) were admitted to intensive or intermediate-intensive care unit and 219 (3.6 %) died within 30 days. A higher triage acuity level was associated with numerous events, including acute surgery, endovascular intervention, i.v. treatment, cardiac arrest, stroke, admission to intensive care, hospital transfer, and mortality within 30 days (p < 0.001). The TRIAGE database has been completed and includes data and blood samples from 6005 unselected consecutive hospitalized patients. More than 40 % experienced no events and were therefore potentially unnecessary hospital admissions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 14%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Professor 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 37 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 15%
Engineering 6 6%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 39 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 February 2019.
All research outputs
#12,745,422
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#721
of 1,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,851
of 387,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,258 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 387,568 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.