ArticleCureus2024
Predicting Mortality in Trauma Research: Evaluating the Performance of Trauma Scoring Tools in a South African Population.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive Performance of Trauma Scoring Systems for Mortality in Patients with High-Energy Trauma in the Emergency Department.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Independent risk of death from hemorrhage and traumatic brain injury in polytrauma: findings from a prospective, multi-center study in the Western Cape of South Africa.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2026Observational
- Correlates of incident hypocalcemia amongst trauma patients in the Western Cape of South Africa: a secondary analysis of the Epidemiology and Outcomes of Prolonged Trauma Care (EpiC) study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- The Suitability of the South African Triage Scale (SATS) in Triaging Patients With Penetrating Neck Injuries at a High-Level Trauma Center, in the Western Cape, South Africa.World journal of surgery · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Trauma is a leading cause of death and disability in low-resource settings, yet trauma severity scores are seldom validated in these contexts. There is a pressing need to better characterize and compare trauma scoring tools, especially within research frameworks. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of various trauma scoring tools in predicting in-hospital mortality among trauma patients in South Africa. Methods This study conducted a secondary analysis of existing data from the multicenter Epidemiology and Outcomes of Prolonged Trauma Care (EpiC) study, which included 13,548 adult trauma patients aged 18 years and older, collected between August 2021 and March 2024. The predictive ability of the scoring tools was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Results The mortality rate was 2.5% (n = 298). The Kampala Trauma Score (KTS) demonstrated the highest predictive ability for seven-day in-hospital mortality, with an AUROC of 0.95 and an AUPRC of 0.53. Similarly, the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) and the New Injury Severity Score (NISS) also exhibited strong predictive capabilities, with AUROC values of 0.96 and AUPRC values of 0.62 for TRISS and an AUROC of 0.96 and AUPRC of 0.53 for NISS. In contrast, the Revised Trauma Score and Mechanism, Glasgow Coma Scale, Age, and Arterial Pressure (MGAP) showed lower predictive performance, with AUROC values of 0.87 (AUPRC = 0.51) and 0.86 (AUPRC = 0.47), respectively. Conclusions The KTS exhibited optimal performance characteristics for retrospectively predicting mortality in our cohort, outperforming other scoring tools. Notably, it is also the simplest scoring tool, featuring the fewest variables compared to other trauma severity assessments. These findings highlight the necessity for external validation of trauma scoring tools in resource-limited populations to ensure their applicability and effectiveness in trauma research across diverse healthcare settings.
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.