ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2026
Standardized data definitions for adult trauma video review: an expert consensus report.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Trauma video review (TVR) provides granular data for quality improvement, education, and research but is hampered by a lack of standardized data definitions, which limits multicenter collaboration, benchmarking, and the generalizability of findings. We aimed to develop a universal data dictionary and collection tool through an expert consensus process to standardize adult TVR data capture across institutions. Methods: The Trauma Video Review Collaborative convened a multidisciplinary panel of subject matter experts in trauma resuscitation from eight centers in the USA and Canada. Through a series of virtual meetings and discussions between May 2023 and July 2024, the group used a consensus-based process to identify and define core data elements. The development focused on core data elements directly observable from video, structured to mirror the clinical workflow of trauma resuscitation. Results: The final standardized data dictionary includes 95 items (44 categorical and 51 numeric/timestamps) with detailed definitions to ensure uniform collection. Categorical variables can be marked "unable to determine" to distinguish from missing data, as are the numeric/timestamps with a predefined timestamp. All timestamps are in military time format. Data points are pragmatically organized into five categories: (1) pre-arrival preparation, (2) handoff, (3) resuscitation period, (4) procedures and interventions, and (5) non-technical skills, incorporating the Trauma Non-Technical Skills tool. The dictionary is designed to link with registry data for patient demographics and outcomes. Conclusion: This work establishes the first expert consensus-driven, universal data dictionary for adult TVR. It provides a common lexicon to standardize data collection, facilitating robust multicenter research, enabling objective benchmarking, and lowering the barrier to entry for new TVR programs. This tool represents a critical foundational step toward creating a large-scale TVR data registry to advance the science and practice of trauma resuscitation.
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.