Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34870230›Full record

ArticleArchives of academic emergency medicine2021

Physiologic Scoring Systems versus Glasgow Coma Scale in Predicting In-Hospital Mortality of Trauma Patients; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

Farhad Heydari, Reza Azizkhani, Omid Ahmadi, Saeed Majidinejad, Mohammad Nasr-Esfahani, Ahmad Ahmadi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Farhad HeydariDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Reza AzizkhaniDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Omid AhmadiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Saeed MajidinejadDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Mohammad Nasr-EsfahaniDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Ahmad AhmadiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn recent years, several scoring systems have been developed to assess the severity of trauma and predict the outcome of trauma patients. This study aimed to compare Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) in predicting the in-hospital mortality of trauma patients.

methodsThis diagnostic accuracy study was done on adult patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) between June 21, 2019, and September 21, 2020, following multiple trauma. Patients were followed as long as they were hospitalized. The REMS, MEWS, GCS, and ISS were calculated after data gathering and comprehensive assessment of injuries. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed to examine the prognostic performance of the four different tools.

resultsOf the 754 patients, 32 patients (4.2%) died and 722 (95.8%) survived after 24 hours of admission. The mean age of the patients was 38.54 ± 18.58 years (78.9% male). The area under the ROC curves (AUC) of REMS, MEWS, ISS, and GCS score for predicting in-hospital mortality were 0.942 (95% CI [0.923-0.958]), 0.886 (95% CI [0.861-0.908]), 0.866 (95% CI [0.839-0.889]), and 0.851 (95% CI [0.823-0.876]), respectively. The AUC of REMS was significantly higher than GCS (p=0.035). The sensitivities of GCS ≤ 11, ISS ≥ 13, REMS ≥ 4, and MEWS ≥ 3 scores for in-hospital mortality were 0.56, 0.97, 0.81, and 0.94, respectively. Also, the specificities of GCS, ISS, REMS, and MEWS scores for in-hospital mortality were 0.93, 0.82, 0.81, and 0.85, respectively.

conclusionIt seems that REMS is more accurate than GCS, ISS, and MEWS in predicting in-hospital mortality ≥ 24 hours of multiple trauma patients.

Indexed as

Emergency servicehospitalInjury severity scoreMultiple traumaPatient outcome assessmentPrognosisscoring system/ Clinical Decision Rules

Identifiers

PMID34870230
PMCPMC8628642

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.