Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33971922›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2021

Defining major trauma: a Delphi study.

Lee Thompson, Michael Hill, Fiona Lecky, Gary Shaw

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Blood Transfusion for Major Trauma in Emergency Department.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  16. Conceptual definition for drowning prevention: a Delphi study.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Forecasting Food Innovations with a Delphi Study.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Journal Update.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2021
    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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lee ThompsonNorth East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Ambulance HQ, Bernicia House, Goldcrest Way, Newburn Riverside, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE15 8NY, England. lee.thompson@neas.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0820-1662
Michael HillNorthumbria University, Coach Lane Campus, Coach Lane, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE7 7TR, England.
Fiona LeckyUniversity of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, England.
Gary ShawNorth East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Ambulance HQ, Bernicia House, Goldcrest Way, Newburn Riverside, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE15 8NY, England.
North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust · GBNorthumbria University · GBSalford Royal NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRetrospective trauma scores are often used to categorise trauma, however, they have little utility in the prehospital or hyper-acute setting and do not define major trauma to non-specialists. This study employed a Delphi process in order to gauge degrees of consensus/disagreement amongst expert panel members to define major trauma.

methodA two round modified Delphi technique was used to explore subject-expert consensus and identify variables to define major trauma through systematically collating questionnaire responses. After initial descriptive analysis of variables, Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to determine statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in response to the Delphi statements between professional groups. A hierarchical cluster analysis was undertaken to identify patterns of similarity/difference of response. A grounded theory approach to qualitative analysis of data allowed for potentially multiple iterations of the Delphi process to be influenced by identified themes.

resultsOf 55 expert panel members invited to participate, round 1 had 43 participants (Doctor n = 20, Paramedic n = 20, Nurse n = 5, other n = 2). No consistent patterns of opinion emerged with regards to professional group. Cluster analysis identified three patterns of similar responses and coded as trauma minimisers, the middle ground and the risk averse. Round 2 had 35 respondents with minimum change in opinion between rounds. Consensus of > 70% was achieved on many variables which included the identification of life/limb threatening injuries, deranged physiology, need for intensive care interventions and that extremes of age need special consideration. It was also acknowledged that retrospective injury severity scoring has a role to play but is not the only method of defining major trauma. Various factors had a majority of agreement/disagreement but did not meet the pre-set criteria of 70% agreement. These included the topics of burns, spinal immobilisation and whether a major trauma centre is the only place where major trauma can be managed.

conclusionBased upon the output of this Delphi study, major trauma may be defined as: "Significant injury or injuries that have potential to be life-threatening or life-changing sustained from either high energy mechanisms or low energy mechanisms in those rendered vulnerable by extremes of age".

Indexed as

ConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansMaleMiddle AgedResearch DesignRetrospective StudiesWounds and InjuriesDelphiMajor traumaPrehospital

Identifiers

PMID33971922
PMCPMC8108467
OpenAlexW3112456298

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.