Abstract
Introduction Models for digital triage of sick children at emergency departments of hospitals in resource poor settings have been developed. However, prior to their adoption, external validation should be performed to ensure their generalizability.
Methods We externally validated a previously published nine-predictor paediatric triage model (SMART Triage) developed in Uganda using data from two hospitals in Kenya. Both discrimination and calibration were assessed, and recalibration was performed by optimizing the intercept for classifying patients into emergency, priority, or non-urgent categories based on low-risk and high-risk thresholds.
Results A total of 2539 patients were eligible at Hospital 1 and 2464 at Hospital 2, and 5003 for both hospitals combined; admission rates were 8.9%, 4.5%, and 6.8%, respectively. The model showed good discrimination, with area under the receiver-operator curve (AUC) of 0.826, 0.784 and 0.821, respectively. The pre-calibrated model at a low-risk threshold of 8% achieved a sensitivity of 93% (95% confidence interval, (CI):89%-96%), 81% (CI:74%-88%), and 89% (CI:85%–92%), respectively, and at a high-risk threshold of 40%, the model achieved a specificity of 86% (CI:84%–87%), 96% (CI:95%-97%), and 91% (CI:90%-92%), respectively. Recalibration improved the graphical fit, but new risk thresholds were required to optimize sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusion The Smart Triage model showed good discrimination on external validation but required recalibration to improve the graphical fit of the calibration plot. There was no change in the order of prioritization of patients following recalibration in the respective triage categories. Recalibration required new site-specific risk thresholds that may not be needed if prioritization based on rank is all that is required. The Smart Triage model shows promise for wider application for use in triage for sick children in different settings.
Funder Wellcome Trust (UK)
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04304235
Funding Statement
This work was funded by Wellcome Trust. The funders were not involved in the study’s conception, data collecting, analysis, interpretation, or manuscript-writing processes.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by institutional review boards at Kenya Medical Research Institute Scientific Ethics Review Unit KEMRI (SERU#3958) in Kenya and the University of British Columbia in Canada (ID: H19-02398 H20-00484).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data studied and data dictionary is available upon request and users who wish to reuse the source data can make a request through KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Program data governance committee. This committee can be contacted at dgc@kemri-wellcome.org.
