The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Association between clinically abnormal observations and subsequent in-hospital mortality: a prospective study
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND Patients with unexpected in-hospital cardiac arrest often have an abnormal clinical observation prior to the arrest. Previous studies have suggested that a medical emergency team responding to such patients may decrease in-hospital mortality from cardiac arrest, but the association between any abnormal clinical observation and subsequent increased mortality has not been studied prospectively. The aim of this study was to determine the predictive value of selected abnormal clinical observations in a ward population for subsequent in-hospital mortality. DESIGN AND SETTING Prospective data collection in five general hospital ward areas at Dandenong Hospital, Victoria, Australia. INTERVENTIONS None. RESULTS During the study period, 6303 patients were admitted to the study areas. Of those, 564 (8.9%) experienced 1598 pre-determined clinically abnormal events and 146 of these patients (26%) died. The two commonest abnormal clinical events were arterial oxygen desaturation (51% of all events), and hypotension (17.3% of all events). Using a multiple linear logistic regression model, there were six clinical observations which were significant predictors of mortality. These were: a decrease in Glasgow Coma Score by two points, onset of coma, hypotension (<90 mmHg), respiratory rate <6 min(-1), oxygen saturation <90%, and bradycardia >30 min(-1). The presence of any one of the six events was associated with a 6.8-fold (95% CI: 2.7-17.1) increase in the risk of mortality. CONCLUSIONS Six abnormal clinical observations are associated with a high risk of mortality for in-hospital patients. These observations should be included as criteria for the early identification of patients at higher risk of unexpected in-hospital cardiac arrest.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hodgetts, T. J., Kenward, G., Vlachonikolis, I. G., Payne, S., & Castle, N. (2002) · Resuscitation · doi:10.1016/s0300-9572(02)00100-4 · Cited by 355
Cited by
Levett-Jones, T., Hoffman, K., Dempsey, J., Jeong, S. Y.-S., Noble, D., Norton, C. A., Roche, J., & Hickey, N. (2010) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2009.10.020 · Cited by 484
Gao, H., McDonnell, A., Harrison, D. A., Moore, T., Adam, S., Daly, K., Esmonde, L., Goldhill, D. R., Parry, G. J., Rashidian, A., et al. (2007) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-007-0532-3 · Cited by 466
Brekke, I. J., Puntervoll, L. H., Pedersen, P. B., Kellett, J., & Brabrand, M. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0210875 · Cited by 312
Sankey, C. B., McAvay, G., Siner, J. M., Barsky, C. L., & Chaudhry, S. I. (2016) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-016-3654-x · Cited by 60
Alarm limit settings for early warning systems to identify at risk patients
Burgess, L. P. A., Herdman, T. H., Berg, B. W., Feaster, W. W., & Hebsur, S. (2009) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05048.x · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Buist, M., Bernard, S., Nguyen, T. V., Moore, G., & Anderson, J.
- Venue
- Resuscitation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2004-08
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 137-141
- ISSN
- 0300-9572 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2117162164
- Cited by
- 501
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Association between clinically abnormal observations and subsequent in-hospital mortality: a prospective study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.03.005
- The paper
- Buist, M., Bernard, S., Nguyen, T. V., Moore, G., & Anderson, J. (2004). Association between clinically abnormal observations and subsequent in-hospital mortality: a prospective study. Resuscitation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.03.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.