ArticleHeliyon2024
Comparison of GAP, R-GAP, and new trauma score (NTS) systems in predicting mortality of traffic accidents that injure hospitals at Mashhad University of medical sciences.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Forecasting Road Traffic Injuries in North-Eastern Iran: The Effects of COVID-19 and Time Series Analysis (2009-2023).Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2026Article
- Comparison of Trauma Scoring Systems for Predicting Mortality in Emergency Department Patients with Traffic-Related Multiple Trauma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- TERMINAL-24 Score in Predicting Early and In-hospital Mortality of Trauma Patients; a Cross-sectional.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are several trauma scoring systems with varying levels of accuracy and reliability that have been developed to predict and classify mortality in trauma patients in the hospital admission. Considering the importance of the country's emergency organization and the World Health Organization in the category of traffic accidents, we used this information in the study. The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the predictive power of three scoring systems (R-GAP, GAP, and NTS) on traffic accident injuries. Methods: In an analytical cross-sectional study, all the data related to the mission of traffic accidents at the pre-hospital emergency management of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in 2022 were extracted from the automation system, and the outcome of the patients in the hospital was recorded from the integrated hospital system. Then, GAP, R-GAP, and New Trauma Scores (NTS) were calculated, and their results were compared using ROC curve and logistic regression. Results: In this study, 47,971 injuries from traffic accidents were evaluated. Their average age was 30.16 ± 10.93 years. R-GAP showed negligible difference than GAP and NTS scores (the area under the curve equals 0.904, 0.935, and 0.884, respectively), and the average scores of R-GAP, GAP, and NTS are equal to 22.45/45 ± 1/9, 22.25 ± 1.5, and 22.49 ± 1.3, respectively. Injury severity based on R-GAP, GAP, and NTS scores was mild in most patients. The effect of these models on the patient outcome based on OR values, R-GAP, GAP, and NTS models showed high values. All analysis was performed in SPSS 26. Conclusion: According to the study results, it seems that R-GAP, GAP, and NTS, have the highest power to predict death in traffic accident injuries. It is recommended to include these points in the electronic file of the pre-hospital emergency for the injured. Also, the severity and outcome of the patient can be predicted by these scores, which play an important role in the triage of the injured and determining the appropriate treatment center.
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.