Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35210312›Full record

ArticleInjury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention2022

Non-fatal injury data: characteristics to consider for surveillance and research.

Andrea E Carmichael, Michael F Ballesteros, Judith R Qualters, Karin A Mack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Comparison of US TBI-related emergency department visits from two data sources: NEISS-AIP and HCUP-NEDS.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2025
    Article
  2. 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.

Andrea E CarmichaelOak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), Division of Injury Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA acarmichael@cdc.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-0821-4471
Michael F BallesterosDivision of Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Judith R QualtersDivision of Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Karin A MackDivision of Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAll data systems used for non-fatal injury surveillance and research have strengths and limitations that influence their utility in understanding non-fatal injury burden. The objective of this paper was to compare characteristics of major data systems that capture non-fatal injuries in the USA.

methodsBy applying specific inclusion criteria (eg, non-fatal and non-occupational) to well-referenced injury data systems, we created a list of commonly used non-fatal injury data systems for this study. Data system characteristics were compiled for 2018: institutional support, years of data available, access, format, sample, sampling method, injury definition/coding, geographical representation, demographic variables, timeliness (lag) and further considerations for analysis.

resultsEighteen data systems ultimately fit the inclusion criteria. Most data systems were supported by a federal institution, produced national estimates and were available starting in 1999 or earlier. Data source and injury case coding varied between the data systems. Redesigns of sampling frameworks and the use of International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification/International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification coding for some data systems can make longitudinal analyses complicated for injury surveillance and research. Few data systems could produce state-level estimates.

conclusionThoughtful consideration of strengths and limitations should be exercised when selecting a data system to answer injury-related research questions. Comparisons between estimates of various data systems should be interpreted with caution, given fundamental system differences in purpose and population capture. This research provides the scientific community with an updated starting point to assist in matching the data system to surveillance and research questions and can improve the efficiency and quality of injury analyses.

Indexed as

International Classification of DiseasesPopulation SurveillanceHumansUnited Statescoding systemsinjury diagnosissurveillance

Identifiers

PMID35210312
PMCPMC9133150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.