ArticleCJEM2021
Contemporary uses of trauma video review: a scoping review.
Article in CJEM, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of video review tools for assessing non-technical skills in emergency department resuscitation teams: a systematic review.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Systems-based care of the injured child: Technical report.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2025Article
- Surgeon leadership in trauma resuscitation requires a competency-based multimodal training framework.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Review
- Reliability of the safety threats and adverse events in trauma (STAT) taxonomy using trauma video review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Article
- Introducing the Safety Threats and Adverse events in Trauma (STAT) taxonomy: standardized classification system for evaluating safety during trauma resuscitation.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTrauma resuscitations are sporadic, high-acuity situations and conducting observation in the trauma bay for the purpose of quality improvement is challenging. We aim to review contemporary uses of trauma video review.
methodsMedline and Embase were searched from 1980 to May 2020 for studies involving trauma video review. English studies of adult and paediatric populations were included for study and analysed for uses of trauma video review, outcomes measured and any resulting quality improvement (QI) initiatives.
resultsA total of 463 publications were identified with 21 studies meeting eligibility for final inclusion. A majority of studies (11) observed technical skills with analysis of critical procedures, including tracheal intubation and thoracotomy. The remaining studies observed team dynamics and communication. Overall, eight studies resulted in new policies being put in place for trauma resuscitations and six studies utilized trauma video review as an educational tool.
conclusionsThis study highlights common uses of trauma video review. The greatest benefit for this new technology is in quality improvement and education. The majority of studies focussed on critical procedures and QI initiatives, such as checklists, protocols and continued education. We recommend adoption of video review systems for ongoing improvement of team dynamics and overall trauma and emergency resuscitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34453728What 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.