↓ Skip to main content

How vital are the vital signs? a multi-center observational study from emergency departments of Pakistan

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
How vital are the vital signs? a multi-center observational study from emergency departments of Pakistan
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/1471-227x-15-s2-s10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amber Mehmood, Siran He, Waleed Zafar, Noor Baig, Fareed Ahmed Sumalani, Juanid Abdul Razzak

Abstract

Vital signs play a critical role in prioritizing patients in emergency departments (EDs), and are the foundation of most triage methods and disposition decisions. This study was conducted to determine the frequency of vital signs documentation anytime during emergency department treatment and to explore if abnormal vital signs were associated with the likelihood of admission for a set of common presenting complaints. Data were collected over a four-month period from the EDs of seven urban tertiary care hospitals in Pakistan. The variables included age, sex, hospital type (government run vs. private), presenting complaint, ED vital signs, and final disposition. Patients who were >12 years of age were included in the analysis. The data were analyzed to describe the proportion of patients with documented vitals signs, which was then crossed-tabulated with top the ten presenting complaints to identify high-acuity patients and correlation with their admission status. A total of 274,436 patients were captured in the Pakistan National Emergency Department Surveillance (Pak-NEDS), out of which 259,288 patients were included in our study. Vital signs information was available for 90,569 (34.9%) patients and the most commonly recorded vitals sign was pulse (25.7%). Important information such as level of consciousness was missing in the majority of patients with head injuries. Based on available information, only 13.3% with chest pain, 12.8% with fever and 12.8% patients with diarrhea could be classified as high-acuity. In addition, hospital admission rates were two- to four-times higher among patients with abnormal vital signs, compared with those with normal vital signs. Most patients seen in the EDs in Pakistan did not have any documented vital signs during their visit. Where available, the presence of abnormal vital signs were associated with higher chances of admission to the hospital for the most common presenting symptoms.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 22%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Student > Master 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 12 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 22%
Engineering 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 13 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 14 January 2016.
All research outputs
#3,280,752
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
#160
of 748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,750
of 389,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
#14
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 748 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 389,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.