Treatments for Trauma-Induced Coagulopathy: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) is a common and potentially life-threatening coagulopathy as a result of traumatic injury, characterized by abnormal blood clotting and bleeding. Although several treatments have been proposed for TIC, their effectiveness and safety remain unclear. Further, numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses on trauma have been conducted; however, to our knowledge, there is no systematic review and meta-analysis that specifically focuses on TIC management. Therefore, a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence on interventions for TIC is needed. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of interventions for the management of TIC. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials as well as observational studies regarding severe trauma in patients with TIC. The interventions will include administration of coagulation factor concentrates, tranexamic acid, and blood component products. The control group will be managed with an ordinal transfusion or administered placebo. The primary outcome will be in-hospital mortality. We will search the electronic databases of MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts, retrieve the full text of the selected articles, and extract essential data. We will apply uniform criteria for evaluating the risk of bias associated with individual randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized trials based on the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Risk ratio values will be expressed as point estimates with 95% CIs. Continuous variables will be expressed as the mean difference along with their 95% CIs and P values. We will assess the strength of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. This review will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis providing information on the effectiveness and safety of interventions for the management of TIC, including the administration of coagulation factor concentrates, tranexamic acid, and blood component products. Ethics approval and patient consent were not required for this study protocol, as we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of publicly available data, without any direct involvement of human participants. RESULTS: We will summarize the selection of the eligible studies using a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flowchart. The results will be presented in a table summarizing the evidence. The results of the meta-analysis will be depicted using figures and forest plots. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review will provide updated information on the efficacy and safety of using coagulation factor concentrates, tranexamic acid, and blood component products for patients with TIC. To our knowledge, there is no systematic review and meta-analysis that specifically focuses on treatments for TIC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN registry UMIN000050170; https://tinyurl.com/yr8pcrj6. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49582.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,057 | 0,090 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,024 | 0,034 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,010 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,069 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».