Observational studyPloS one2026
Prognostic accuracy of the CMPMIT-ICD-10, APACHE Ⅱ, SOFA, ISS, and AIS for in-hospital death among patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock.
Observational study in PloS one, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The China Mortality Prediction Model in Trauma, which is based on the International Classification of Disease Disorders (ICD)-10-CM lexicon (CMPMIT-ICD-10),is a new trauma scoring system. Our objective was to compare the prognostic performance of the CMPMIT-ICD10 with that of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHEII), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Injury Severity Score (ISS), and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) for in-hospital mortality in patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock(THS).This retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at a tertiary teaching hospital from May 1, 2013, to May 31, 2023.The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and associations with outcomes of theCMPMIT-ICD-10, APACHE II, SOFA, ISS, and AIS scores for the prediction of in-hospital death were assessed. A total of 420 patients with THS were included. Forty-one (9.8%) patients died during hospitalization. For the prediction of in-hospital death, the CMPMIT-ICD-10 (0.8757) and APACHE II(0.8709) had greater AUCs compared with the AIS (0.6243), SOFA (0.7669), and ISS (0.6601). With the best cut-off value of 59.5, the CMPMIT-ICD10 had a highest sensitivity (85.4%) and good specificity(79.9%) and overall accuracy (80.4%). The CMPMIT-ICD10 (OR 1.057, 95% CI 1.028-1.087, p < 0.001) and APACHE II (OR 1.125, 95% CI 1.045-1.211, p = 0.002) were independently associated with in-hospital death. Comparable to the APACHE II but significantly better than the SOFA, ISS, and AIS, the CMPMIT-ICD-10 performed well in predicting the short-term mortality of patients with THS. These findings suggest that the CMPMIT-ICD-10 may have superior utility for predicting short-term death in THS patients.
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.