Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30355971›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018

The Reverse Shock Index Multiplied by Glasgow Coma Scale Score (rSIG) and Prediction of Mortality Outcome in Adult Trauma Patients: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Based on Registered Trauma Data.

Shao-Chun Wu, Cheng-Shyuan Rau, Spencer C H Kuo, Peng-Chen Chien, Hsiao-Yun Hsieh, Ching-Hua Hsieh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Shao-Chun WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University and College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan. shaochunwu@gmail.com.
Cheng-Shyuan RauDepartment of Neurosurgery, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University and College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan. ersh2127@cloud.cgmh.org.tw.
Spencer C H KuoDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University and College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan. spenc19900603@gmail.com.
Peng-Chen ChienDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University and College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan. venu_chien@hotmail.com.
Hsiao-Yun HsiehDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University and College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan. sylvia19870714@hotmail.com.
Ching-Hua HsiehDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University and College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan. m93chinghua@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-0945-2746

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The reverse shock index (rSI) multiplied by Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score (rSIG), calculated by multiplying the GCS score with systolic blood pressure (SBP)/hear rate (HR), was proposed to be a reliable triage tool for identifying risk of in-hospital mortality in trauma patients. This study was designed to externally validate the accuracy of the rSIG in the prediction of mortality in our cohort of trauma patients, in comparison with those that were predicted by the Revised Trauma Score (RTS), shock index (SI), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS). Adult trauma patients aged ≥20 years who were admitted to the hospital from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2017, were included in this study. The rSIG, RTS, and SI were calculated according to the initial vital signs and GCS scores of patients upon arrival at the emergency department (ED). The end-point of primary outcome is in-hospital mortality. Discriminative power of each score to predict mortality was measured using area under the curve (AUC) by plotting the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for 18,750 adult trauma patients, comprising 2438 patients with isolated head injury (only head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) ≥ 2) and 16,312 without head injury (head AIS ≤ 1). The predictive accuracy of rSIG was significantly lower than that of RTS in all trauma patients (AUC 0.83 vs. AUC 0.85,

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlood PressureCross-Sectional StudiesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleGlasgow Coma ScaleHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedShockTaiwanWounds and InjuriesGlasgow Coma Scale (GCS)Injury Severity Score (ISS)mortalityRevised Trauma Score (RTS)shock index (SI)the rSI multiplied by GCS score (rSIG)the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS)

Identifiers

PMID30355971
PMCPMC6266192

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.