ArticleRevista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes2026
The role of the Revised Trauma Score in penetrating trauma.
Article in Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe Revised Trauma Score (RTS) is one of the primary tools used to predict mortality in trauma patients. RTS is calculated at admission based on respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure, and Glasgow Coma Scale score. Its accuracy has been evaluated in several studies; however, most have predominantly included victims of blunt trauma, making its applicability to penetrating injuries a matter of ongoing debate.
objectiveTo compare the prognostic accuracy of the RTS for mortality prediction in patients with blunt trauma versus penetrating trauma.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included trauma patients treated at a referral hospital. The prognostic accuracy of the RTS for each trauma mechanism was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, and comparisons were performed using the DeLong test. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify additional independent predictors of trauma mortality. The chi-square test was used to determine a cutoff point for the RTS in penetrating trauma that would correspond to the reference cutoff adopted for blunt trauma.
resultsA total of 3,575 patients were included. Of these, 2,448 (68.5%) sustained blunt trauma and 1,127 (31.5%) penetrating trauma. The area under the curve for mortality prediction was 0.813 in the blunt trauma group and 0.800 in the penetrating trauma group, with no statistically significant difference between them. Independent predictors of mortality included age, RTS value, acidosis, coagulopathy, and penetrating mechanism.
conclusionThe RTS is an accurate tool for predicting mortality in both blunt trauma and penetrating trauma.
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.