ArticleBMC emergency medicine2024
Earthquake victims in focus: a cross-sectional examination of trauma and management in intensive care unit.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Crush injury syndrome in earthquakes: a systematic review and meta-analysis on its frequency and complications.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- A retrospective review of patients admitted to a tertiary intensive care unit following the February 6th earthquake in Türkiye.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2026Article
- Impact of crush syndrome severity on clinical outcomes after the earthquakes in southeastern Türkiye.BMC nephrology · 2026Observational
- Nursing as an earthquake survivor: A qualitative study on nurses traumatized by the Kahramanmaraş earthquake in Turkey.International nursing review · 2025Article
- The efficiency of blood cell counts and inflammatory indices in prediction of need for acute kidney injury in patients with crush syndrome.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter the Kahramanmaras earthquake of February 6, 2023, the disaster of the century, a significant number of victims were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). In this study, we aimed to share the characteristics and management of critical earthquake victims and shed light on our experiences as intensivists in future earthquakes.
methodsThe study included 62 earthquake victims in two tertiary ICUs. Demographic characteristics, laboratory findings, clinical characteristics, trauma and disease severity scores, treatments administered to patients, and the clinical course of the patients were recorded retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups, survivors and nonsurvivors, according to 7-day mortality and into two groups according to the duration of their stay under the rubble: those who remained under the rubble for 72 hours or less and those who remained under the rubble for more than 72 hours. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the best cutoff value for the 'Circulation, Respiration, Abdomen, Motor, and Speech' (CRAMS) score.
resultsThe median age of the 62 patients included in the study was 35.5 (23-53) years. The median length of stay under the rubble for the patients was 30.5 (12-64.5) hours. The patient was transferred to the ward with a maximum duration of 222 hours under the rubble. The limb (75.8%) was the most common location of trauma in patients admitted to the ICU. Crush syndrome developed in 96.8% of the patients. There was a positive correlation between the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) and myoglobin, serum lactate, and uric acid levels (r = 0.372, p = 0.003; r = 0.307, p = 0.016; r = 0.428, p = 0.001, respectively). The best cutoff of the CRAMS score to predict in-7-day mortality was < 4.5 with 0.94 area under the curve (AUC); application of this threshold resulted in 75% sensitivity and 96.3% specificity.
conclusionSearch and rescue operations should continue for at least ten days after an earthquake. The CRAMS score can be used to assess trauma severity and predict mortality in critically ill earthquake victims.
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.