Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 501

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 access
Buist, Michael, Bernard, Stephen, Nguyen, Tuan V, Moore, Gaye, Anderson, Jeremy·2004·Resuscitation

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.03.005

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 501

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.