Comparison of AIMS65 and Glasgow Blatchford scores in predicting mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira, ISSN: 1806-9282, Vol: 67, Issue: 5, Page: 766-770
2021
- 9Citations
- 109Usage
- 9Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- Usage109
- Full Text Views105
- 105
- Abstract Views4
- Captures9
- Readers9
Article Description
OBJECTIVE: Several mortality prediction scores are available for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding who visited the emergency department; however, most of the available scores include endoscopic data. Endoscopy is difficult or impossible to access for many emergencies departments worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the performance of the albumin, INR, alteration in mental status, systolic blood pressure and age 65 score and the Glasgow-Blatchford score in predicting mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding who visited the emergency department and for which endoscopic data were not required. METHODS: The data of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding who visited the emergency department during the study period were retrospectively analyzed. The data were obtained from the hospital automation system using the international classification of disease codes via computer registration. The prediction accuracy of AIMS65 and Glasgow-Blatchford score was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve method. RESULTS: There were 422 patients in total; the mean age of these patients was 68.5 while 62.6% were males. The mortality rate was 30 (7.1%). The AIMS65 score performed better with an AUC 0.706 [95%CI 0.660–0.749; p<0.001] compared with the Glasgow-Blatchford score (AUC 0.542; 95%CI 0.4693–0.576; p=0.11). CONCLUSION: In this study, it was revealed that AIMS65, which is a score that can be easily calculated only with the data in the emergency department, outperformed Glasgow-Blatchford score in predicting mortality in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding who visited the emergency department.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85116780102&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20210580; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34550270; http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021000600766&tlng=en; http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021000600766&lng=en&tlng=en; http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0104-42302021000600766&lng=en&tlng=en; http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021000600766; http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0104-42302021000600766; https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20210580; https://www.scielo.br/j/ramb/a/mCTTsdxXyVVBtCHk33tQJ6R/?lang=en
FapUNIFESP (SciELO)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know