ArticlePloS one2026
Comparative efficacy of trauma scoring for predicting in-hospital mortality in elderly patients in China and Thailand: A multicenter retrospective study.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith global population aging, trauma prediction models are essential for elderly patients, yet established scoring systems lack validation in Asian populations. This study evaluates clinical characteristics, mortality risk factors, and the predictive efficacy of trauma scoring systems in elderly trauma patients in China and Thailand.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective cohort study included trauma patients aged ≥65 years admitted to four Level 1 trauma centers between 01/01/2023 and 31/12/2023. The analyzed variables included demographics, clinical data, and trauma scores (ISS, NISS, RTS, TRISS, GTOS). Multivariable logistic regression and ROC curve analysis were performed.
resultsAmong 963 patients (median age 73 years; 50.6% female), in-hospital mortality was 7.9%. Independent risk factors included age, cancer history, INR, blood transfusion, GCS, and all trauma scores. TRISS had the highest predictive value (AUC = 0.871), followed by GTOS (0.852) and RTS (0.839), all outperforming ISS and NISS.
conclusionAge, comorbidities, and trauma scores are significant predictors of in-hospital mortality in elderly trauma patients. TRISS, GTOS, and RTS offer superior prognostic performance, aiding early identification and management of high-risk individuals.
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.