Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 818

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Management of bleeding following major trauma: an updated European guideline

Open access
Rossaint, Rolf, Bouillon, Bertil, Cerny, Vladimir, Coats, Timothy J, Duranteau, Jacques, Fernández-Mondéjar, Enrique, Hunt, Beverley J, Komadina, Radko, Nardi, Giuseppe, Neugebauer, Edmund, Ozier, Yves, Riddez, Louis, Schultz, Arthur, Stahel, Philip F, Vincent, Jean-Louis, Spahn, Donat R·2010·Critical Care

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence-based recommendations are needed to guide the acute management of the bleeding trauma patient, which when implemented may improve patient outcomes. Methods: The multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was formed in 2005 with the aim of developing a guideline for the management of bleeding following severe injury. This document presents an updated version of the guideline published by the group in 2007. Recommendations were formulated using a nominal group process, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) hierarchy of evidence and based on a systematic review of published literature. Results: Key changes encompassed in this version of the guideline include new recommendations on coagulation support and monitoring and the appropriate use of local haemostatic measures, tourniquets, calcium and desmopressin in the bleeding trauma patient. The remaining recommendations have been reevaluated and graded based on literature published since the last edition of the guideline. Consideration was also given to changes in clinical practice that have taken place during this time period as a result of both new evidence and changes in the general availability of relevant agents and technologies. Conclusions: This guideline provides an evidence-based multidisciplinary approach to the management of critically injured bleeding trauma patients.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/cc8943

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 818

Metadata

Authors
Rossaint, R., Bouillon, B., Cerny, V., Coats, T. J., Duranteau, J., Fernández-Mondéjar, E., Hunt, B. J., Komadina, R., Nardi, G., Neugebauer, E., Ozier, Y., Riddez, L., Schultz, A., Stahel, P. F., Vincent, J.-L., & Spahn, D. R.
Venue
Critical Care
Published
2010-04-06
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
R52-R52
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062474169
Cited by
818
References
5
FWCI
76.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Management of bleeding following major trauma: an updated European guideline. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/cc8943
The paper
Rossaint, R., Bouillon, B., Cerny, V., Coats, T. J., Duranteau, J., Fernández-Mondéjar, E., Hunt, B. J., Komadina, R., Nardi, G., Neugebauer, E., Ozier, Y., Riddez, L., Schultz, A., Stahel, P. F., Vincent, J.-L., & Spahn, D. R. (2010). Management of bleeding following major trauma: an updated European guideline. Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc8943

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.