ArticleAcute medicine & surgery
External Validation of the Traumatic Bleeding Severity Score for the Predictive Accuracy of the Need for Massive Transfusion.
Article in Acute medicine & surgery. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Traumatic Bleeding Severity Score (TBSS), developed in Japan, has shown high predictive accuracy in internal validation; however, external validation has still not been performed. We conducted the first external validation of the TBSS in Japan and compared it with other massive transfusion (MT) prediction scores. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included severe trauma patients (aged ≥ 18 years, Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥ 16) from 25 tertiary critical care centers (April 2018-March 2019), excluding those with isolated head injury or cardiac arrest on arrival. TBSS's accuracy for predicting MT was analyzed using the area under the curve (AUC). A complete case was the primary approach, with sensitivity analysis using multiple imputed datasets. The Trauma-Associated Severe Hemorrhage (TASH) score and Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) score were also evaluated for comparison. Results: Of 1193 patients, 873 were eligible, and 365 patients were included in the complete case analysis. The median age was 63 (interquartile range [IQR]: 45-75) years, the median ISS was 25 (IQR: 20-34), 69.3% were male individuals, 98.1% experienced blunt trauma, and 24.7% received MT. TBSS' AUC was 0.86 (sensitivity: 70.1%; specificity: 88.4%). The TASH score showed a comparable AUC of 0.88 ( Conclusion: TBSS' accuracy for predicting MT was comparable to that of the TASH score and superior to that of the ABC score. Further research is needed to determine its clinical utility and broader applicability in trauma care.
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.