MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400763656 · doi:10.1016/j.injury.2024.111747

Injury severity bias in missing prehospital vital signs: Prevalence and implications for trauma registries

2024· article· en· W4400763656 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Melissa O’Neill, Sheldon Cheskes, Ian R. Drennan, Charles Keown‐Stoneman, Steve Lin, Brodie Nolan

Bibliographic record

VenueInjury · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentrePublic Health OntarioSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineVital signsEmergency medicineMissing dataMedical emergencyAnesthesiaStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vital signs are important factors in assessing injury severity and guiding trauma resuscitation, especially among severely injured patients. Despite this, physiological data are frequently missing from trauma registries. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of missing prehospital data in a hospital-based trauma registry and to assess the associations between prehospital physiological data completeness and indicators of injury severity. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on all adult trauma patients brought directly to a level 1 trauma center in Toronto, Ontario by paramedics from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. The proportion of missing data was evaluated for each variable and patterns of missingness were assessed. To investigate the associations between prehospital data completeness and injury severity factors, descriptive and unadjusted logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 3,528 patients were included. We considered prehospital data missing if any of heart rate, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate or oxygen saturation were incomplete. Each individual variable was missing from the registry in approximately 20 % of patients, with oxygen saturation missing most frequently (n = 831; 23.6 %). Over 25 % (n = 909) of patients were missing at least one prehospital vital sign, of which 69.1 % (n = 628) were missing all four of these variables. Patients with incomplete data were more severely injured, had higher mortality, and more frequently received lifesaving interventions such as blood transfusion and intubation. Patients were most likely to have missing prehospital physiological data if they died in the trauma bay (unadjusted OR: 9.79; 95 % CI: 6.35-15.10), did not survive to discharge (unadjusted OR: 3.55; 95 % CI: 2.76-4.55), or had a prehospital GCS less than 9 (OR: 3.24; 95 % CI: 2.59-4.06). CONCLUSION: In this single center trauma registry, key prehospital variables were frequently missing, particularly among more severely injured patients. Patients with missing data had higher mortality, more severe injury characteristics and received more life-saving interventions in the trauma bay, suggesting an injury severity bias in prehospital vital sign missingness. To ensure the validity of research based on trauma registry data, patterns of missingness must be carefully considered to ensure missing data is appropriately addressed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInjurySame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207