Journal Club Summary

Methodology Score: 3.5/5              
Usefulness Score: 3 /5
 
Seymour CW, et al. 
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):762-74
 
Editorial: New Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock Continuing Evolution but With Much Still to Be Done
Abraham E.
JAMA. 2016;315(8):757-759
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2492856

This is a retrospective cohort study that looked to validate the use current sepsis scores (SOFA, SIRS, LODS) as clinical criteria for sepsis, and to derive and validate a new, simple clinical score, qSOFA which includes RR, BP and GCS, that can be calculated with information that can be gathered quickly at the bedside. They were able to collect a large amount of encounters encompassing different types of population adding to the robustness of the derivation and validation. However, it was only validated retrospectively and not prospectively. Currently, the Sepsis-3 guideline, including qSOFA, is not endorses by SAEM or ACEP, given emergency physicians were not involved in the task force.

By: Dr. Isabelle Miles
 

Epi lesson: 

When describing the validity of measurement tools, various terms are commonly used:

Construct validity (which is of main concern), refers to how well a test measures what it claims to measure. 
Criterion validity refers to the extent with which a test can predict an outcome now or in the future. Content validity refers to the extent to which a measure represents all facets of a given construct. Face validity is the extent to which a test is subjectively viewed by stakeholders as measuring the construct it claims to measure. 

Author

Subscribe to get updated on our latest posts!

Join our mailing list to receive the latest posts from our team (once a week only!).

You have Successfully Subscribed!