Pediatric trauma recidivism in an urban cohort
Abstract
Background Recidivism is a well-known problem in adult trauma patients. Trauma recidivists are a population that warrants further intervention to prevent future trauma. Among pediatric patients, the recidivism rate, demographics, mechanism, and mortality are unknown. We hypothesized that specific groups of pediatric trauma recidivists could be identified for targeted prevention efforts. Methods All pediatric trauma patients admitted to a level 1 pediatric trauma center in an urban county hospital between 1991 and 2010 were reviewed. Age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale, injury location, injury cause, disposition, length of stay, and mortality were collected and compared between nonrecidivist and recidivist cohorts. Results The recidivism rate among patients aged 0-19 y was 1.5% compared with 0.9% in those aged 0-16 y. Recidivists were more likely males (P Conclusions The pediatric recidivism rate in our population is small. Nevertheless, recidivists are more than twice as likely to be injured by penetrating trauma, especially GSWs. Targeted screening and counseling in this demographic may be helpful in reducing youth trauma recidivism.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The comprehensive and representative sample may account for the higher recurrent injury observed in this study compared to others reporting recurrent firearm injury ranging from one to 10% across a variety of clinical and geographic settings and time periods.
“This may account for the higher recurrent injury observed in this study compared to others reporting recurrent firearm injury ranging from one to 10% across a variety of clinical and geographic settings and time periods.15,18,33-44”
From Incidence of and Factors Associated With Recurrent Firearm Injury Among Patients Presenting to St. Louis Trauma Centers, 2010 to 2019 (2023) · cites this paper as [34]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mueller, K. L., Cooper, B. P., Moran, V., Lew, D., Ancona, R., Landman, J. M., Spruce, M., Marotta, P., Liss, D. B., Mancini, M. A., et al. (2023) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m23-0069 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“SVI category, n (%) Low 774 (8) 655 (8) 53 (5) Average 3323 (34) 2763 (34) 335 (30) High 5670 (58) 4613 (57) 732 (65)”
- Authors
- Davis, J. S., Pandya, R. K., Sola, J. E., Perez, E. A., Neville, H. L., & Schulman, C. I.
- Affiliations
- University of Miami (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Surgical Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-06
- Volume
- 182
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 326-330
- ISSN
- 0022-4804 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2097279373
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Surgical Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
- Social Sciences › Health › Gun Ownership and Violence Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
- Keywords
- pediatric trauma, trauma recidivism, gunshot wounds, penetrating trauma, injury prevention, trauma mortality, injury mechanisms
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Retrospective Studies, Wounds and Injuries, Cohort Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review