Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Trauma centers manage an active Trauma Registry from which research, quality improvement, and epidemiologic information are extracted to ensure optimal care of the trauma patient. We evaluated coding procedures using the Relational Trauma Scoring System to determine the relative accuracy of the Relational Trauma Scoring System for coding diagnoses in comparison to the standard retrospective chart-based format. Charts from 150 patients admitted to a level I trauma service were abstracted using standard methods. These charts were then randomized and abstracted by trauma nurse clinicians with coding software aide. For charts scored pre-training, percent correct for the trauma nurse clinicians ranged from 52 to 64 percent, while the registrars scored 51 percent correct. After training, percentage correct for the trauma nurse clinicians increased to a range of 80-86 percent. Our research has demonstrated implementable changes that can significantly increase the accuracy of data from trauma centers.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1460458215610896 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!