Evidence Hub

Mortality predictors in pediatric emergency department presentations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Alsabri M, ELKarargy MA, Ata IM, Khalifa MA, Hamid AK, Elsnhory AB, Abdelwahab OA, Urbon S

BMC emergency medicine, 2025

1 citation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pediatric patients present to the emergency departments (EDs) with a wide range of clinical manifestations, ranging from mild to severe. A systematic approach is crucial to identify those at high risk of deterioration. However, the predictive value of such predictors remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES: Our study aims to evaluate different mortality predictors used in pediatric emergency departments (PEDs) regarding the diagnostic accuracy metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio.

METHODS: We comprehensively searched multiple databases and included all cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized controlled trials from January 2000 to December 2024 with pediatric patients (aged 0-18 years) presenting to PEDs, where mortality predictors were used to assess for in-ED and short-term post-ED mortality. We employed a bivariate random-effects model for data synthesis and analysis to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) values.

RESULTS: 329 Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS) thresholds were analyzed, with the model-derived optimal cutoff 2.189 (AUC) = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.76), high pooled sensitivity (0.95, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.80) and specificity (0.93, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.80). In addition, A strong negative predictive value (NPV = 0.0006) and modest positive predictive value (PPV = 0.0003) were noted. Heterogeneity was significant (I²>99%), driven by PEWS versions and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free