ArticleInternational journal of critical illness and injury science
Comparative evaluation of rapid emergency medicine score (REMS) and emergency trauma score (EMTRAS) against traditional trauma scoring systems-namely the injury severity score (ISS), new injury severity score (NISS), revised trauma score (RTS), and trauma and injury severity score (TRISS) in predicting trauma outcomes.
Article in International journal of critical illness and injury science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic Performance of the Lactate-to-Ionized Calcium Ratio for In-Hospital Mortality in Adult Major Trauma: A Retrospective Emergency Department Cohort Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Early Risk Stratification of Severe Trauma in the Emergency Department: Integrating Clinical Scoring Systems, Dynamic Biomarkers, and Artificial Intelligence-A Narrative Review.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Trauma scoring systems are essential for predicting outcomes in trauma patients, guiding clinical decisions, and optimizing resource allocation. Common systems include the Injury Severity Score (ISS), New ISS (NISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Trauma and ISS (TRISS), Emergency Trauma Score (EMTRAS), and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS). This study aims to evaluate the predictive accuracy of REMS and EMTRAS in comparison to traditional trauma scoring systems. Methods: This prospective observational study involved 1090 trauma patients admitted to the Department of Emergency Medicine from January 2021 to December 2023. Eligible patients were aged 18 or older with documented trauma. Data collection encompassed demographics, clinical parameters, and trauma severity, assessed using six scoring systems. Outcomes were monitored until patient discharge or death. Results: The cohort consisted of 915 (83.9%) male patients with a mean age of 36.1 years. Road traffic accidents were the leading cause of trauma, 934 (85.6%). Intensive care unit patients exhibited higher ISS and lower RTS scores ( Conclusions: REMS and EMTRAS had reasonable sensitivity and specificity but were less effective than traditional systems such as ISS, NISS, RTS, and TRISS. TRISS emerged as the most reliable tool for predicting outcomes, supporting its continued use as the gold standard in trauma assessment.
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.