ArticleHeliyon2022
Accuracy and external validation of the modified rapid emergency medicine score in road traffic injuries in a Bangkok level I trauma center.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Can the Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (mREMS) Predict Trauma Patients' Outcomes in a Deteriorated Health System After Decades of Conflict?
Comparative Predictive Accuracy of EMTRAS, REMS, and GAP Scores for Mortality, Endotracheal Intubation, and Length of Hospitalization in Trauma Patients: The First Prospective Cohort Study From Iraq
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Trauma is a significant public health problem. Therefore, many injury scores have been created to predict mortality and triage patients. This study aims to validate the modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (mREMS) for in-hospital mortality prediction in road traffic injuries and compare the mREMS with the revised trauma score (RTS) and the mechanisms, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), age, and arterial pressure (MGAP) score. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from the Vajira Hospital (1,033 cases). The mREMS was calculated from six predictors: age, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, pulse oxygen saturation, and GCS. The receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. The AUC and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the mREMS were compared with the AUCs of other scores. Model calibration was assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. Results: The mREMS was significantly better than the RTS at predicting death in road traffic injury patients [mREMS: AUCs, 0.909 (95% CI, 0.866-0.951); RTS: AUCs, 0.859 (95% CI, 0.791-0.927] (p = 0.023). However, the difference between the AUCs of the mREMS and MGAP score was not statistically significant (p = 0.150). The mREMS' calibration performance was also satisfactory in this dataset based on the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test (p = 0.277). Conclusion: In the road traffic injury population, the mREMS is an excellent predictor of in-hospital mortality. These results can be applied to improve triage. However, this score should be further validated in other trauma centers before nationwide implementation.
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.