The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Revalidation and update of the TASH‐Score: a scoring system to predict the probability for massive transfusion as a surrogate for life‐threatening haemorrhage after severe injury
Abstract
Background The Trauma Associated Severe Haemorrhage (TASH)‐Score has been recognized as an easy‐to‐calculate scoring system to predict the probability for massive transfusion (MT) as a surrogate for life‐threatening haemorrhage after injury. Changes with respect to management and outcome of these patients over time prompted a revalidation and an update of the TASH‐Score. Methods The performance of the TASH‐Score developed from the 1993–2003 TR‐DGU database (Trauma Registry Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie/German Trauma Society) was revalidated on 5834 datasets from the 2004–2007 TR‐DGU database with respect to discrimination, precision and calibration. The performance of the TASH‐Score applied onto the 2004–2007 TR‐DGU database was compared to its initial performance, and the logistic function to calculate the probability for MT was modified for score adjustment. Results/Conclusions When the original TASH‐Score was applied onto the 2004–2007 TR‐DGU database, a slight increase in discrimination was observed while precision was considerably lower. The predicted rate for MT within the development dataset was 13·9% while the observed incidence was 14·1%. In contrast, the predicted rate for MT within the revalidation dataset was 11·7%, while the observed rate was 8·4%. The logistic function to calculate MT probability was modified, and the TASH‐Score was again evaluated against the most recent TR‐DGU 2004–2007 database. The high performance of the score was not only restored but enhanced reflected by an increased ROC/AUC of 0·905. The score can be calculated quickly upon arrival of the patient in the emergency department and may be supportive to correct coagulopathy, to activate logistics and for research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mortality by cause for eight regions of the world: Global Burden of Disease Study
Murray, C. J., & Lopez, A. D. (1997) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)07493-4 · Cited by 4,043
Cited by
Holcomb, J. B., del Junco, D. J., Fox, E. E., Wade, C. E., Cohen, M. J., Schreiber, M. A., Alarcon, L. H., Bai, Y., Brasel, K. J., Bulger, E. M., et al. (2013) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/2013.jamasurg.387 · Cited by 1,107
FIBTEM provides early prediction of massive transfusion in trauma
Schöchl, H., Cotton, B., Inaba, K., Nienaber, U., Fischer, H., Voelckel, W., & Solomon, C. (2011) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc10539 · Cited by 313
Metadata
- Authors
- Maegele, M., Lefering, R., Wafaisade, A., Theodorou, P., Wutzler, S., Fischer, P., Bouillon, B., Paffrath, T., & the Trauma Registry of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (TR‐DGU)
- Venue
- Vox Sanguinis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-08-24
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 231-238
- ISSN
- 0042-9007 (ISSN-L)
- 1423-0410
- OpenAlex
- W2103297882
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Revalidation and update of the TASH‐Score: a scoring system to predict the probability for massive transfusion as a surrogate for life‐threatening haemorrhage after severe injury. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1423-0410.2010.01387.x
- The paper
- Maegele, M., Lefering, R., Wafaisade, A., Theodorou, P., Wutzler, S., Fischer, P., Bouillon, B., Paffrath, T., & the Trauma Registry of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (TR‐DGU). (2011). Revalidation and update of the TASH‐Score: a scoring system to predict the probability for massive transfusion as a surrogate for life‐threatening haemorrhage after severe injury. Vox Sanguinis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1423-0410.2010.01387.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.