MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improving the TRISS Methodology by Restructuring Age Categories and Adding Comorbidities

2004· article· en· W2047615298 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Bergeron, Michel Rossignol, Turner Osler, David Clas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjury Severity ScoreMedicineLogistic regressionBlunt traumaReceiver operating characteristicComorbidityEmergency medicineStatisticPopulationTrauma centerRevised Trauma ScorePoison controlInjury preventionRetrospective cohort studyStatisticsSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) methodology was developed to predict the probability of survival after trauma. Despite many criticisms, this methodology remains in common use. The purpose of this study was to show that improving the stratification for age and adding an adjustment for comorbidity significantly increases the predictive accuracy of the TRISS model. METHODS: The trauma registry and the hospital administrative database of a regional trauma center were used to identify all blunt trauma patients older than 14 years of age admitted with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes 800 to 959 from April 1993 to March 2001. Each individual medical record was then reviewed to ascertain the Revised Trauma Score, the Injury Severity Score, the age of the patients, and the presence of eight comorbidities. The outcome variable was the status at discharge: alive or dead. The study population was divided into two subsamples of equal size using a random sampling method. Logistic regression was used to develop models on the first subsample; a second subsample was used for cross-validation of the models. The original TRISS and three TRISS-derived models were created using different categorizations of Revised Trauma Score, Injury Severity Score, and age. A new model labeled TRISSCOM was created that included an additional term for the presence of comorbidity. RESULTS: There were 5,672 blunt trauma patients, 2,836 in each group. For original TRISS, the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic (HL) was 179.1 and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was 0.873. Sensitivity and specificity were 99.0% and 27.8%, respectively. For the best modified TRISS model, the HL statistic was 20.35, the AUROC curve was 0.902, the sensitivity was 99.0%, and the specificity was 27.8%. For TRISSCOM, the HL statistic was 14.95 and the AUROC curve was 0.918. Sensitivity and specificity were 99.0% and 29.7%, respectively. The difference between the two models almost reached statistical significance (p = 0.086). When TRISSCOM was applied to the cross-validation group, the HL statistic was 10.48 and the AUROC curve was 0.914. The sensitivity was 98.6% and the specificity was 34.9%. CONCLUSION: TRISSCOM can predict survival more accurately than models that do not include comorbidity. A better categorization of age and the inclusion of comorbid conditions in the logistic model significantly improves the predictive performance of TRISS.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207