Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35643425›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2022

Evaluation of the Revised Trauma Score, MGAP, and GAP scoring systems in predicting mortality of adult trauma patients in a low-resource setting.

Zeinab Mohammed, Yaseen Saleh, Eman Mohammed AbdelSalam, Norhan B B Mohammed, Emad El-Bana, Jon Mark Hirshon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Prediction of massive transfusion and mortality in early trauma care: A retrospective analysis of scoring systems.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Zeinab MohammedDepartment of Public Health and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, 62521, Egypt.
Yaseen SalehDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Miami Health System, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. yasaleh2@uic.edu.
Eman Mohammed AbdelSalamDepartment of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, 62521, Egypt.
Norhan B B MohammedDepartment of Translational Medicine, Translational Glycobiology Institute at FIU, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
Emad El-BanaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, 62521, Egypt.
Jon Mark HirshonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.

Funding

INJURY PREVENTION TRAINING IN EGYPT AND THE MIDDLE EASTD43TW007296 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI HIRSHON, JON MARK · 2005 to 2020
$3.5M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW007296
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous trauma scoring systems have been developed in an attempt to accurately and efficiently predict the prognosis of emergent trauma cases. However, it has been questioned as to whether the accuracy and pragmatism of such systems still hold in lower-resource settings that exist in many hospitals in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In this study, it was hypothesized that the physiologically-based Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Mechanism/Glasgow Coma Scale/Age/Pressure (MGAP) score, and Glasgow Coma Scale/Age/Pressure (GAP) score would be effective at predicting mortality outcomes using clinical data at presentation in a representative LMIC hospital in Upper Egypt.

methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of the medical records of trauma patients at Beni-Suef University Hospital. Medical records of all trauma patients admitted to the hospital over the 8-month period from January to August 2016 were reviewed. For each case, the RTS, MGAP, and GAP scores were calculated using clinical data at presentation, and mortality prediction was correlated to the actual in-hospital outcome.

resultsThe Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUROC) was calculated to be 0.879, 0.890, and 0.881 for the MGAP, GAP, and RTS respectively, with all three scores showing good discriminatory ability. With regards to prevalence-dependent statistics, all three scores demonstrated efficacy in ruling out mortality upon presentation with negative predictive values > 95%, while the MGAP score best captured the mortality subgroup with a sensitivity of 94%. Adjustment of cutoff scores showed a steep trade-off between optimizing the positive predictive values versus the sensitivities.

conclusionThe RTS, MGAP, and GAP all showed good discriminatory capabilities per AUROC. Given the relative simplicity and potentially added clinical benefit in capturing critically ill patients, the MGAP score should be further studied for stratifying risk of incoming trauma patients to the emergency department, allowing for more efficacious triage of patients in lower-resource healthcare settings.

Indexed as

TriageAdultGlasgow Coma ScaleHospital MortalityHumansRetrospective StudiesTrauma Severity IndicesGlobal healthLMICsTrauma mortalityTrauma scoresTriage

Identifiers

PMID35643425
PMCPMC9148470

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.