Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38506389›Full record

ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2024

Evaluation of emergency department admissions of mass casualty patients using the revised trauma score, injury severity score, and trauma and injury severity score.

Bahadır Karaca, Mehmet Kemal Emem, Burak Çelik, Nurdan Yılmaz Şahin

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bahadır KaracaDepartment of Emergency, Sancaktepe Şehit Prof. Dr. Ilhan Varank Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul-Türkiye.
Mehmet Kemal EmemDepartment of Emergency, İstanbul Provincial Directorate of Health Istanbul Prof. Dr. Cemil Taşçıoğlu City Hospital, İstanbul-Türkiye.
Burak ÇelikDepartment of Emergency, University of Health Sciences Fatih Sultan Mehmet Health Practice and Research Center, İstanbul-Türkiye.
Nurdan Yılmaz ŞahinDepartment of Emergency, University of Health Sciences Istanbul Kartal Dr. Lutfi Kirdar City Hospital, İstanbul-Türkiye.
Education Training And Research · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need for studies evaluating prognostic scoring systems in mass trauma patients in conflict regions to predict patient prognosis for emergency surgical prioritization. In this study, we aimed to evaluate scoring systems such as the Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) in trauma patients admitted due to mass trauma in Northern Syria.

methodsThis study was a retrospective evaluation of patients admitted due to mass trauma to the emergency departments of hospitals in Northern Syria. The diagnostic efficiency of RTS, ISS, and TRISS scoring systems was evaluated in these admissions in the first half of 2021.

resultsThe most common causes of mass trauma were bomb blast (67.3%), gunshot (28.8%), and 14 (3.9%) patients admitted with other causes. When the odds ratio (OR) was analyzed, a one-unit increase in the RTS score increased the odds of survival by a factor of 6.133, and a one-unit increase in the TRISS score increased the odds of survival by a factor of 1.057. Differently, it was found that each 1-unit increase in ISS decreased the patient's probability of survival by 0.856 units. When RTS, TRISS, and ISS scores were analyzed, the area under the ROC curve was statistically significant for all of them (p<0.001) and all of them had a diagnostic value for mortality with sensitivities of 99.0%, 94.8%, and 91.9%; specificities of 87.8%, 90.5%, and 88.6; AUC of 0.958, 0.975, and 0.958, respectively.

conclusionThe use of trauma scoring systems, especially TRISS, may be useful for prioritizing patients in mass casualty settings in the presence of overcapacity.

Indexed as

Wounds and InjuriesWounds, GunshotEmergency Service, HospitalHumansInjury Severity ScorePredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesROC CurveTrauma Severity Indices

Identifiers

PMID38506389
PMCPMC10977491
OpenAlexW4392806604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.