ArticlePloS one2025
Long-term impact of battle injuries; Ten-year follow-up of Dutch servicemembers injured in Afghanistan.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur five-year follow-up of injured service members deployed to Afghanistan showed that battlefield casualties (BCs) experience lower quality of life and higher distress than non-injured peers. This ten-year follow-up aims to extend the understanding of the long-term impact of battlefield injuries and to enrich the knowledge of long-term impacts of combat wounds.
methodsDutch service members deployed to Afghanistan (2006-2010) were divided into groups: injured by hostile actions (BCs) and two control groups-non-injured combat unit members (CG1) and non-injured staff (CG2). Data on injuries, demographics, and rank were gathered, and participants completed an online survey covering trauma, reintegration, distress, quality of life and physical and mental health. Group differences were assessed using Kruskall-Wallis tests and ANOVA.
resultsThe mean age of participants in the BC group (n = 47) was lower than CG1 (n = 95) and CG2 (n = 64). BCs reported significantly higher levels of distress compared to control groups. Of 25 significantly different scores between the three subgroups in our five-year follow-up, all but the Work Positive PDRS subscore remained significantly different compared with the control group. Additionally, the EQ-6D and General Health SF-36 subscore were significant at five years but not this study.
conclusionService members with battlefield injuries report significantly lower quality of life, predominantly in physical functioning, and higher psychological distress compared to non-injured peers. Most differences between BCs and non-injured peers identified in our 5Y follow-up remained significantly different. We provide recommendations to improve the quality of aftercare based on our observations (1) periodical evaluation every 3-5 years, (2) comprehensive assessment of care needs and (3) balancing disease burden and health to optimize societal and workplace integration.
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.