Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41333682›Full record

ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2025

Performance of individual audit filters in predicting opportunities for improvement in adult trauma patients.

Josef Al-Khalili, Jonatan Attergrim, Johanna Berg, Kelvin Szolnoky, Martin Gerdin Wärnberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Audit filters: beyond linear assumption.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026
    Article
  4. Audit filters: netting opportunities.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Josef Al-KhaliliDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9159-5194
Jonatan AttergrimDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9546-5788
Johanna BergDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7553-7337
Kelvin SzolnokyDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0554-1872
Martin Gerdin WärnbergDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6069-4794

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Trauma audit filters, based on standards of care, serve as quality indicators and screening tools for patient cases to be assessed at interdisciplinary morbidity and mortality conferences. These conferences aim to identify potential opportunities for improvement in the care of trauma patients. This study aimed to determine the performance of individual audit filters in predicting opportunities for improvement and their relevance as screening tools for morbidity and mortality conferences. Methods: We conducted a single-center registry-based retrospective cohort study based on registered data collected between 2013 and 2022 from the Karolinska University Hospital in Sweden. Performance was measured using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and Matthews correlation coefficient for 10 audit filters used at the Karolinska University Hospital. Results: Our analysis included 8309 patients. Audit filters demonstrated inconsistent agreement with opportunities for improvement with a Matthews correlation coefficient ranging from -0.088 (95% CI -0.129 to -0.044) for "Injury Severity Score >15 and no team activation" to 0.092 (95% CI 0.058 to 0.126) for "> 60 min until first major intervention." The Matthews correlation coefficient for all audit filters combined was 0.118 (95% CI 0.104 to 0.131). Conclusion: No individual audit filter or combination thereof performed well in predicting opportunities for improvement, which suggests that the current method of screening for morbidity and mortality conferences should be revisited. Level of evidence: Level III, prognostic/epidemiological.

Indexed as

quality improvement

Identifiers

PMID41333682
PMCPMC12666069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.