Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40556382›Full record

ArticlePrehospital and disaster medicine2025

The Use of the Shock Index to Classify Patients During Mass-Casualty Incident Triage.

David Jerome, David W Savage, Matthew Pietrosanu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

David JeromeClinical Assistant Professor, Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Assistant Professor, Division of Clinical Sciences, NOSM University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada; Assistant Adjunct Professor, Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada; ORCID: 0002-1831-4273.ORCID 0000-0002-1831-4273
David W SavageAssistant Professor, Division of Clinical Sciences, NOSM University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada; ORCID: 0000-0003-2837-3127.
Matthew PietrosanuDepartment of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada; ORCID: 0003-2349-0535.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDuring mass-casualty incidents (MCIs), prehospital triage is performed to identify which patients most urgently need medical care. Formal MCI triage tools exist, but their performance is variable. The Shock Index (SI; heart rate [HR] divided by systolic blood pressure [SBP]) has previously been shown to be an efficient screening tool for identifying critically ill patients in a variety of in-hospital contexts. The primary objective of this study was to assess the ability of the SI to identify trauma patients requiring urgent life-saving interventions in the prehospital setting.

methodsClinical data captured in the Alberta Trauma Registry (ATR) were used to determine the SI and the "true" triage category of each patient using previously published reference standard definitions. The ATR is a provincial trauma registry that captures clinical records of eligible patients in Alberta, Canada. The primary outcome was the sensitivity of SI to identify patients classified as "Priority 1 (Immediate)," meaning they received urgent life-saving interventions as defined by published consensus-based criteria. Specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated as secondary outcomes. These outcomes were compared to the performance of existing formal MCI triage tools referencing performance characteristics reported in a previously published study.

resultsOf the 9,448 records that were extracted from the ATR, a total of 8,650 were included in the analysis. The SI threshold maximizing Youden's index was 0.72. At this threshold, SI had a sensitivity of 0.53 for identifying "Priority 1" patients. At a threshold of 1.00, SI had a sensitivity of 0.19.

conclusionsThe SI has a relatively low sensitivity and did not out-perform existing MCI triage tools at identifying trauma patients who met the definition of "Priority 1" patients.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesHeart RateMass Casualty IncidentsShockTriageWounds and InjuriesAdultAgedAlbertaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesDisaster Medicinemass casualtyprehospitaltriage

Identifiers

PMID40556382
PMCPMC12237700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.