ArticleAdvanced journal of emergency medicine2017
Outcome of Trauma Patients Admitted to Emergency Department Based on Full Outline of Unresponsiveness Score.
Article in Advanced journal of emergency medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the Prognostic Accuracy of Full Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) Score with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) Score among Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury in a Tertiary Care Center.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2024Article
- Neurological deteriorations in mild brain injuries: the strategy of evaluation and management.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Epidemiological Features of Injured Patients Examined by Tehran Emergency Medical Service Technicians.Advanced journal of emergency medicine · 2019Article
- The Effect of Implementation of the Standard Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for Management of Multiple Trauma Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department.Advanced journal of emergency medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFull Outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score is one of the existing scoring scales, which has been used for evaluating the level of consciousness in recent years.
objectiveThe present study has been done with the aim of evaluating the ability to predict the outcome of patients with head trauma based on FOUR score on admission to emergency department (ED).
methodsIn the present prospective cross-sectional study, head trauma patients with any changes in alertness level presenting to ED were evaluated. FOUR score measurement was done on admission and 6 hours after that. The studied outcomes in the current study included discharge without sequel, discharge with neurologic sequel, brain death or death during 1 month after admission of the patients. To evaluate the correlation between FOUR score and the studied outcomes, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used.
resultsIn the end, 52 patients with the mean age of 32.67 ± 15.20 years were evaluated (84.6% male). Traffic accident with the frequency of 39 (75.0%) patients was the most common mechanism of trauma among the studied patients and finally, after 1 month follow up it was determined that 13 (25%) patients were discharged without sequel and 31 (59.6%) died. Area under the ROC curve for prediction of the final outcome of death using FOUR score on admission and after 6 hours were 0.889 (95% confidence interval: 0.800 - 0.977) and 0.974 (95% confidence interval: 0.938 - 1.000), respectively. Best cutoff points for FOUR score were the scores 8 and 9 on admission of the patients, and the score 5, six hours after admission.
conclusionBased on the findings of this study, it seems that FOUR score is applicable for prediction of probable death outcome in patients with head trauma presenting to ED.
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.