ArticlePloS one2015
Long-term impact of battle injuries; five-year follow-up of injured Dutch servicemen in Afghanistan 2006-2010.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Value-based healthcare from a military health system perspective: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Long-term impact of battle injuries; Ten-year follow-up of Dutch servicemembers injured in Afghanistan.PloS one · 2025Article
- The relative impact of injury and deployment on mental and physical quality of life among military service members.PloS one · 2022Article
- Coping strategies of Dutch servicemembers after deployment.Military Medical Research · 2019Article
- Psychological distress and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 4-year policemen cohort study in China.BMJ open · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesUnits deployed to armed conflicts are at high risk for exposure to combat events. Many battle casualties (BCs) have been reported in the recent deployment to Afghanistan. The long-term impact of these combat injuries, at their five-year end point, is currently unknown. To date, no systematic inventory has been performed of an identified group of BCs in comparison to non-injured service members from the same operational theatre.
designObservational cross-sectional cohort study.
settingOpen online survey among Dutch BCs that deployed to Afghanistan (2006-2010).
participantsThe Dutch BCs (n = 62) were compared to two control groups of non-injured combat groups (battle exposed [n = 53], and non-battle exposed [n = 73]).
main outcome measuresParticipants rated their impact of trauma exposure (Impact of Events [IES]), post deployment reintegration (Post Deployment Reintegration Scale [PDRS]), general symptoms of distress (Symptom Checklist 90 [SCL-90]), as well as their current perceived quality of life (EuroQol-6D [EQ-6D]). Also cost effectiveness (Short From health survey [SF-36]) and care consumption were assessed (Trimbos/iMTA questionnaire).
resultsOver 90% of BCs were still in active duty. The mean scores of all questionnaires (IES, EQ-6D, SF-36, and SCL-90) of the BC group were significantly higher than in the control groups (p<0.05). The PDRS showed a significantly lower (p<0.05) outcome in the negative subscales. The mean consumption of care was triple that of both control groups. A lower score on quality of life was related to higher levels of distress and impact of trauma exposure.
conclusionsThis study showed a clear long-term impact on a wide range of scales that contributes to a reduced quality of life in a group of BCs. Low perceived cost effectiveness matched with high consumption of care in the BC group in comparison to the control groups. These results warrant continuous monitoring of BCs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.