ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2021
Performance of Prognostication Scores for Mortality in Injured Patients in Rwanda.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiological scoring systems for early identification of critically ill older adults in the emergency department: a prospective observational cohort study.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Reaching the right facility for emergency patients - destinations of patients transported by emergency medical services in Kigali, Rwanda.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Trends in Neurotrauma Epidemiology, Management, and Outcomes during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Kigali, Rwanda.Journal of neurotrauma · 2023Article
- Factors associated with HIV testing among patients seeking emergent injury care in Kigali, Rwanda.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2022Article
- Assessment of standard HIV testing services delivery to injured persons seeking emergency care in Nairobi, Kenya: A prospective observational study.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile trauma prognostication and triage scores have been designed for use in lower-resourced healthcare settings specifically, the comparative clinical performance between trauma-specific and general triage scores for risk-stratifying injured patients in such settings is not well understood. This study evaluated the Kampala Trauma Score (KTS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Triage Early Warning Score (TEWS) for accuracy in predicting mortality among injured patients seeking emergency department (ED) care at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Kigali (CHUK) in Rwanda.
methodsA retrospective, randomly sampled cohort of ED patients presenting with injury was accrued from August 2015-July 2016. Primary outcome was 14-day mortality and secondary outcome was overall facility-based mortality. We evaluated summary statistics of the cohort. Bootstrap regression models were used to compare areas under receiver operating curves (AUC) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsAmong 617 cases, the median age was 32 years and 73.5% were male. The most frequent mechanism of injury was road traffic incident (56.2%). Predominant anatomical regions of injury were craniofacial (39.3%) and lower extremities (38.7%), and the most common injury types were fracture (46.0%) and contusion (12.0%). Fourteen-day mortality was 2.6% and overall facility-based mortality was 3.4%. For 14-day mortality, TEWS had the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.76-1.00), followed by RTS (AUC = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.55-0.92), and then KTS (AUC = 0.65, 95% CI, 0.47-0.84). Similarly, for facility-based mortality, TEWS (AUC = 0.89, 95% CI, 0.79-0.98) had greater accuracy than RTS (AUC = 0.76, 95% CI, 0.61-0.91) and KTS (AUC = 0.68, 95% CI, 0.53-0.83). On pairwise comparisons, RTS had greater prognostic accuracy than KTS for 14-day mortality (P = 0.011) and TEWS had greater accuracy than KTS for overall (P = 0.007) mortality. However, TEWS and RTS accuracy were not significantly different for 14-day mortality (P = 0.864) or facility-based mortality (P = 0.101).
conclusionIn this cohort of emergently injured patients in Rwanda, the TEWS demonstrated the greatest accuracy for predicting mortality outcomes, with no significant discriminatory benefit found in the use of the trauma-specific RTS or KTS instruments, suggesting that the TEWS is the most clinically useful approach in the setting studied and likely in other similar ED environments.
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.