ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Clinical evaluation of a computer-assisted decision support and documentation system for the primary care of polytrauma patients.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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
Background: Polytrauma management demands rapid, high-stakes decisions under severe time pressure, increasing the risk of error and deviation from evidence-based protocols. Computer-assisted decision support systems (CDSS) may counter these risks by improving adherence to guidelines and reducing cognitive strain. We developed TraumaFlow, a CDSS integrating the German S3 guideline and ATLS® principles, and evaluated its impact in real-world trauma care. Methods: In a prospective study at a level 1 trauma center, 30 shock room cases were managed with TraumaFlow alongside the standard paper protocol and compared both with the corresponding paper documentation and with 30 conventionally documented cases from a historical cohort. System-generated recommendations were tracked for implementation. Usability was assessed by questionnaire, and workload measured with the NASA Raw Task Load Index (NASA-RTLX). Results: Eighteen residents (mean age 31 ± 4 years, 56% female) participated in 30 polytrauma cases. Documentation completeness was significantly higher with TraumaFlow compared to paper (20.5/25 items (82%) vs. 18.4/25 items (74%), Conclusion: TraumaFlow enhanced documentation quality and supported guideline-based management in acute polytrauma care. Although no measurable reduction in workload was observed, the system improved structure, reduced risk of omission, and was well accepted by clinicians. These findings highlight the potential of CDSS to strengthen trauma team performance and standardize complex emergency care. Clinical Trial Registration: https://drks.de/register/de/trial/DRKS00034201, Registration No. DRKS00034201.
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.