ArticleEmergency (Tehran, Iran)2017
Rapid Acute Physiology Score versus Rapid Emergency Medicine Score in Trauma Outcome Prediction; a Comparative Study.
Article in Emergency (Tehran, Iran), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Accuracy of Rapid Emergency Medicine Score in Predicting Mortality in Non-Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2022Pooled it
- A newly developed, easy-to-use prehospital drug-derived score compared with three conventional scores: A prospective multicenter study.European journal of clinical investigation · 2025Article
- Evaluation of prognostic scoring systems in patients hospitalized from the emergency department in a low-income region: northern Syria after internal turmoil as a different universe.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2023Article
- A New Rapid Approach for Predicting Death in Coronavirus Patients: The Development and Validation of the COVID-19 Risk-Score in Fars Province (CRSF).Iranian journal of public health · 2022Article
- Predicting the 28-Day Mortality of Non-Trauma Patients using REMS and RAPS; a Prognostic Accuracy Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Glasgow Coma Scale Versus Physiologic Scoring Systems in Predicting the Outcome of ICU admitted Trauma Patients; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Internal validation and comparison of the prognostic performance of models based on six emergency scoring systems to predict in-hospital mortality in the emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2021Observational
- Value of Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS criteria in ruling out clinically important cervical spine injuries: derivation of modified Canadian C-spine rule.La Radiologia medica · 2021Article
- Physiologic Scoring Systems versus Glasgow Coma Scale in Predicting In-Hospital Mortality of Trauma Patients; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2021Article
- The Value of Physiological Scoring Criteria in Predicting the In-Hospital Mortality of Acute Patients; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2021Review
- Comparing Rapid Scoring Systems in Mortality Prediction of Critically Ill Patients With Novel Coronavirus Disease.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2020Article
- Assessment of the Initial Risk Factors for Mortality among Patients with Severe Trauma on Admission to the Emergency Department.The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2019Article
- Glasgow Coma Scale and FOUR Score in Predicting the Mortality of Trauma Patients; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Emergency (Tehran, Iran) · 2018Article
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
introductionRapid acute physiology score (RAPS) and rapid emergency medicine score (REMS) are two physiologic models for measuring injury severity in emergency settings. The present study was designed to compare the two models in outcome prediction of trauma patients presenting to emergency department (ED).
methodsIn this prospective cross-sectional study, the two models of RAPS and REMS were compared regarding prediction of mortality and poor outcome (severe disability based on Glasgow outcome scale) of trauma patients presenting to the EDs of 5 educational hospitals in Iran (Tehran, Tabriz, Urmia, Jahrom and Ilam) from May to October 2016. The discriminatory power and calibration of the models were calculated and compared using STATA 11.
results2148 patients with the mean age of 39.50±17.27 years were studied (75.56% males). The area under the curve of REMS and RAPS in predicting in-hospital mortality were calculated to be 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92-0.95) and 0.899 (95% CI: 0.86-0.93), respectively (p=0.02). These measures were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.90-0.94) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.90), respectively, regarding poor outcome (p=0.001). The optimum cut-off point in predicting outcome was found to be 3 for REMS model and 2 for RAPS model. The sensitivity and specificity of REMS and RAPS in the mentioned cut offs were 95.93 vs. 85.37 and 77.63 vs. 83.51, respectively, in predicting mortality. Calibration and overall performance of the two models were acceptable.
conclusionThe present study showed that adding age and level of arterial oxygen saturation to the variables included in RAPS model can increase its predictive value. Therefore, it seems that REMS could be used for predicting mortality and poor outcome of trauma patients in emergency settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28286837PMC5325900What 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.