IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v13y2016i8p825-d76068.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Qiangyu Deng

    (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.)

  • Bihan Tang

    (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.)

  • Chen Xue

    (Department of Military Health Management, College of Health Service, Second Military Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd., Shanghai 200433, China)

  • Yuan Liu

    (Department of Military Health Management, College of Health Service, Second Military Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd., Shanghai 200433, China)

  • Xu Liu

    (Department of Military Health Management, College of Health Service, Second Military Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd., Shanghai 200433, China)

  • Yipeng Lv

    (Department of Military Health Management, College of Health Service, Second Military Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd., Shanghai 200433, China)

  • Lulu Zhang

    (Department of Military Health Management, College of Health Service, Second Military Medical University, 800 Xiangyin Rd., Shanghai 200433, China)

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 (I 2 > 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiangyu Deng & Bihan Tang & Chen Xue & Yuan Liu & Xu Liu & Yipeng Lv & Lulu Zhang, 2016. "Comparison of the Ability to Predict Mortality between the Injury Severity Score and the New Injury Severity Score: A Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-12, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2016:i:8:p:825-:d:76068
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/8/825/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/8/825/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cheng-Shyuan Rau & Pao-Jen Kuo & Shao-Chun Wu & Yi-Chun Chen & Hsiao-Yun Hsieh & Ching-Hua Hsieh, 2016. "Association between the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians Score and Mortality in Patients with Isolated Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2016:i:8:p:825-:d:76068. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.