Next Article in Journal
A Well-Mixed Computational Model for Estimating Room Air Levels of Selected Constituents from E-Vapor Product Use
Previous Article in Journal
Learning to Stand: The Acceptability and Feasibility of Introducing Standing Desks into College Classrooms
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessReview
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13(8), 825; doi:10.3390/ijerph13080825

Comparison of the Ability to Predict Mortality between the Injury Severity Score and the New Injury Severity Score: A Meta-Analysis

Department of Military Health Management, College of Health Service, Second Military Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd., Shanghai 200433, China
These authors contributed equally to this work.
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Paul B. Tchounwou
Received: 14 June 2016 / Revised: 30 July 2016 / Accepted: 10 August 2016 / Published: 16 August 2016
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [2039 KB, uploaded 16 August 2016]   |  

Abstract

Background: Description of the anatomical severity of injuries in trauma patients is important. While the Injury Severity Score has been regarded as the “gold standard” since its creation, several studies have indicated that the New Injury Severity Score is better. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate and compare the accuracy of the Injury Severity Score and the New Injury Severity Score in predicting mortality. Methods: Two researchers independently searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases and included studies from which the exact number of true-positive, false-positive, false-negative, and true-negative results could be extracted. Quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies checklist criteria. The meta-analysis was performed using Meta-DiSc. Meta-regression, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the source(s) of heterogeneity and factor(s) affecting the accuracy of the New Injury Severity Score and the Injury Severity Score in predicting mortality. Results: The heterogeneity of the 11 relevant studies (total n = 11,866) was high (I2 > 80%). The meta-analysis using a random-effects model resulted in sensitivity of 0.64, specificity of 0.93, positive likelihood ratio of 5.11, negative likelihood ratio of 0.27, diagnostic odds ratio of 27.75, and area under the summary receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.9009 for the Injury Severity Score; and sensitivity of 0.71, specificity of 0.87, positive likelihood ratio of 5.22, negative likelihood ratio of 0.20, diagnostic odds ratio of 24.74, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.9095 for the New Injury Severity Score. Conclusion: The New Injury Severity Score and the Injury Severity Score have similar abilities in predicting mortality. Further research is required to determine the appropriate use of the Injury Severity Score or the New Injury Severity Score based on specific patient condition and trauma type. View Full-Text
Keywords: Injury Severity Score; New Injury Severity Score; mortality; meta-analysis Injury Severity Score; New Injury Severity Score; mortality; meta-analysis
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Deng, Q.; Tang, B.; Xue, C.; Liu, Y.; Liu, X.; Lv, Y.; Zhang, L. Comparison of the Ability to Predict Mortality between the Injury Severity Score and the New Injury Severity Score: A Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 825.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top