ArticlePloS one2026
Performance of four scoring systems in predicting the need for massive transfusion in Iranian trauma patients.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost-traumatic hemorrhage is a leading cause of death if not promptly identified and treated. This study aimed to compare the performance of four scoring systems in predicting the need for massive transfusion (MT) in trauma patients.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed data from trauma patients admitted to Sina Hospital in Tehran between July 2021 and December 2024. All trauma patients who received at least one unit of packed red blood cells were included in the study. Patients were evaluated for the need for MT, and four scoring systems were compared between those who did and did not receive MT. The discriminative ability of the Shock Index (SI), Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC), Revised Assessment of Bleeding and Transfusion (RABT), and Trauma-Associated Severe Hemorrhage (TASH) was evaluated using the concordance index (C-index) and logistic regression models.
resultsA total of 329 trauma patients were included, with a mean age of 49.2 (SD = 20.8) years; 244 (74.2%) were male. MT occurred in 36 patients (10.9%). All four scoring systems were significantly associated with the need for MT (p < 0.001) and showed comparable discriminative performance (C-index range: 0.81-0.84). At predefined cutoff values, sensitivity ranged from 63.9% to 94.4%, specificity from 60.0% to 94.2%, PPV from 22.4% to 59.5%, and NPV from 95.5% to 98.9%. In univariable logistic regression, an ABC score ≥ 2 was significantly associated with MT (OR: 36.9; 95% CI: 15.6-87.3), followed by an RABT score ≥ 2 (OR: 25.5, 95% CI: 11.2-58.1) and a TASH score ≥ 6 (OR: 25.2, 95% CI: 5.9-106.9).
conclusionAll four scoring systems showed significant associations with the need for MT. These tools may assist clinicians in the early risk stratification of trauma patients; however, given the moderate positive predictive values in this low-prevalence setting, they should be used as adjuncts to clinical judgment rather than as standalone triggers for massive transfusion activation.
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.