Key result
Organ dysfunction scores (SOFA and pSOFA) demonstrated adequate performance for resource allocation in critically ill patients, with observed mortality of 11.6% in adults and 2.5% in children.
Why the study?
Do organ dysfunction scores (SOFA, pSOFA, PELOD-2) accurately predict mortality risk for resource allocation in critically ill adults and children compared to published prioritization schemas?
Cohort (n=69,273)
Yes
Do organ dysfunction scores (SOFA, pSOFA, PELOD-2) accurately predict mortality risk for resource allocation in critically ill adults and children compared to published prioritization schemas?
SOFA and pSOFA scores demonstrate adequate performance for mortality risk stratification in critically ill patients, highlighting that existing prioritization schemas may systematically disadvantage children during healthcare crises.
Supports SOFA/pSOFA for crisis triage stratification; leaves open validation against existing pediatric prioritization schemas.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sanchez-Pinto et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Critically ill (n=69,273). Organ dysfunction scores (SOFA, PELOD-2, pSOFA) vs. Published prioritization schemas was evaluated on Mortality. Organ dysfunction scores (SOFA and pSOFA) demonstrated adequate performance for resource allocation in critically ill patients, with observed mortality of 11.6% in adults and 2.5% in children.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: