ArticleJournal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association2022
A 1% TBSA Chart Reduces Math Errors While Retaining Acceptable First-Estimate Accuracy.
Article in Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Toward Better Response Assessment of Cutaneous Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease: A Report from the National Institutes of Health Consensus Project Task Force.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2026Guideline
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Life-threatening and treatment-altering errors occur in estimates of the percentage of total body surface area burned (%TBSA burned) with unacceptable frequency. In response, numerous attempts have been made to improve the charts commonly used for %TBSA-burned estimation. Recent research shows that the largest errors in %TBSA-burned estimates probably come from sources other than inaccurate values in the charts. Here, we develop a taxonomy of the possible sources of error and their impact on %TBSA-burned estimates. Also, we observe that different caregivers have different estimation needs: First-responders require a rapid estimate with sufficient accuracy to enable them to begin care and determine patient transport options, while burn surgeons ordering skin grafts desire accuracy to the square centimeter, and can afford considerable time to attain that accuracy. These competing needs suggest that a one-tool-fits-all-caregivers approach is suboptimal. We therefore present a validated, simplified burn chart that minimizes one of the largest sources of random errors in %TBSA-burned estimates-simple calculation errors-while also being quick and requiring little training. NCHart-1 also enables simple consensus estimates, as well as separation of estimation subtasks across caregivers, leading to several potential improvements in mass casualty situations. Our results demonstrate that NCHart-1 possesses the accuracy necessary for first responders, while reliably producing results in less than 2 minutes. Of 76 healthcare professionals surveyed, a large majority indicated a preference for NCHart-1 over their previous methods for ease of both use and training. For clinical or commercial use of NCHart-1, please contact: tech.commercialization@nationwidechildrens.org.
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.