Escalation metrics, clinical nuance, and the early warning score paradox – Response to Chen et al.

ElsevierVolume 92, February 2026, 104229Intensive and Critical Care NursingAuthor links open overlay panel, , Section snippetsAuthor agreement

JE fulfilled the following authorship criteria according to the CRediT framework: conceptualisation, methodology, investigation, resources, writing, editing, visualisation, and project administration. RE fulfilled the following authorship criteria according to the CRediT framework: conceptualisation, methodology, writing, and editing. BK fulfilled the following authorship criteria according to the CRediT framework: conceptualisation, methodology.

Ethics statement

No ethical approvals were required as this is an editorial piece examining existing literature.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Jody Ede: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Ruth Endacott: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Bridie Kent: Conceptualization, Investigation.

Funding

No funding associated with this letter.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Professor Blot and Editor-in-Chief of Intensive and Critical Care Nursing for providing us with an opportunity to discuss our work further.

References (3)Q. Chen et al.Escalation metrics, clinical nuance, and the Early Warning Score paradox — Letter on Ede et al

Intensive Crit Care Nurs

(2026)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

View full text

Crown Copyright © 2025 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.

Comments (0)

No login
gif