ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2025
Quantifying the Drivers of Survival: A Matched Cohort Study of Trauma Center-Level Differences.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Balanced Component and Whole-Blood Transfusion Practices in US Trauma Centers.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTertiary trauma centers (levels I and II) offer comprehensive care and are equipped to manage complex injuries. Trauma patients treated at tertiary centers have better survival outcomes. However, the specific interventions driving this advantage remain unknown. This study aimed to identify interventions contributing to differences in short-term mortality between tertiary trauma centers (TTCs) and nontertiary trauma centers (NTCs).
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study using Trauma Quality Improvement Program data reported between 2017 and 2022. Propensity score matching (1:1, exact) based on injury severity measures paired 12,423 major trauma patients aged 18-54 y, directly admitted from the injury scene to TTCs, with an equal number treated at NTCs. The Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition method was then used to quantify interventions explaining the difference in 7-d mortality between TTCs and NTCs.
resultsIn the propensity-matched sample, the 7-d in-hospital mortality was significantly higher at NTCs (7.04%) than tertiary centers (5.65%), with a risk ratio of 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-1.37; P = 0.001). The mortality difference of 1.39 percentage points was explained by a higher proportion of massive blood transfusion (45.67%; 95% CI: 27.98-63.35), airway procedure (44.40%; 95% CI 29.06-49.75), hemorrhage control via laparotomy (30.13%; 95% CI: 16.70-43.56), and other cardiac procedures (4.58%; 95% CI: 2.94-6.21), collectively accounting for 55% of the observed mortality difference.
conclusionsThis study suggests that, for similarly injured patients, massive transfusion, airway management, hemorrhage control via laparotomy, and other cardiac procedures performed at TTCs explain most of the observed survival benefit for patients treated at TTCs.
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.