↓ Skip to main content

Validation of a novel prediction model for early mortality in adult trauma patients in three public university hospitals in urban India

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of a novel prediction model for early mortality in adult trauma patients in three public university hospitals in urban India
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12873-016-0079-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Gerdin, Nobhojit Roy, Monty Khajanchi, Vineet Kumar, Li Felländer-Tsai, Max Petzold, Göran Tomson, Johan von Schreeb, On behalf of the Towards Improved Trauma Care Outcomes in India (TITCO)

Abstract

Trauma is one of the top threats to population health globally. Several prediction models have been developed to supplement clinical judgment in trauma care. Whereas most models have been developed in high-income countries the majority of trauma deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Almost 20 % of all global trauma deaths occur in India alone. The aim of this study was to validate a basic clinical prediction model for use in urban Indian university hospitals, and to compare it with existing models for use in early trauma care. We conducted a prospective cohort study in three hospitals across urban India. The model we aimed to validate included systolic blood pressure and Glasgow coma scale. We compared this model with three additional models, which all have been designed for use in bedside trauma care, and two single variable models based on systolic blood pressure and Glasgow coma scale respectively. The outcome was early mortality, defined as death within 24 h from the time when vital signs were first measured. We compared the models in terms of discrimination, calibration, and potential clinical consequences using decision curve analysis. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing data. Performance measures are reported using their median and inter-quartile range (IQR) across imputed datasets. We analysed 4440 patients, out of which 1629 were used as an updating sample and 2811 as a validation sample. We found no evidence that the basic model that included only systolic blood pressure and Glasgow coma scale had worse discrimination or potential clinical consequences compared to the other models. A model that also included heart had better calibration. For the model with systolic blood pressure and Glasgow coma scale the discrimination in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.846 (IQR 0.841-0.849). Calibration measured by estimating a calibration slope was 1.183 (IQR 1.168-1.202). Decision curve analysis revealed that using this model could potentially result in 45 fewer unnecessary surveys per 100 patients. A basic clinical prediction model with only two parameters may prove to be a feasible alternative to more complex models in contexts such as the Indian public university hospitals studied here. We present a colour-coded chart to further simplify the decision making in early trauma care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
India 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 75 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 7 9%
Other 25 32%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Psychology 3 4%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,944,189
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
#680
of 781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,202
of 300,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.