Comparison of existing clinical scoring systems to predict persistent organ failure in patients with acute pancreatitis.
By Rawad Mounzer, Christopher James Langmead, B. Wu, A. Evans, Faraz Bishehsari, Venkata Muddana, Vikesh K. Singh, A. Slivka, D. Whitcomb, D. Yadav and 2 more. 2012
414 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Epidemiology, Nephrology, Surgery
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Surgery
Citations in the corpus
- Interval Coded Scoring: a toolbox for interpretable scoring systems (2018, background): “…scoring systems include Alvarado for appendicitis (Alvarado, 1986), CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc for atrial fibrillation (Lip et al., 2010), Glasgow for pancreatitis (Mounzer et al., 2012), CURB-65 for pneumonia (Jeong et al., 2013) and ASDAS for disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis (Lukas et al., 2009).”
- IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. (2013, background): “fluid resuscitation) and places emphasis on reassessment to guide further management [23].”
- Interval Coded Scoring extensions for larger problems (2017, background): “Examples of such approaches include CHA2DS2-VASc for atrial fibrillation [3], Glasgow for pancreatitis [4] and CURB-65 for pneumonia [5].”