Literature DB >> 8717177

[Possibilities and limits of scores. Theoretical considerations about scores].

G D Giebel1, H Troidl.   

Abstract

Scores are intended to facilitate an accurate appreciation of the overall situation from a few characteristic, reasonably weighted parameters. This definite result in the form of a score means a reduction of reality. For the individual it cannot reasonably be applied in practice. Despite a long list of problems and limitations, a score can describe a collective and thus make it comparable to some extent. Because of the different compositions of the collectives, the value of scores for quality control is limited. The more physiological variables a score contains the more difficult it is to distinguish between the effect of therapy and the clinical course. Therefore, repeated measurement of scores is not useful to verify a therapeutic effect, but it can indicate a trend regarding the endpoint.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8717177     DOI: 10.1007/BF00184257

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Chir        ISSN: 0023-8236


  9 in total

1.  A proposal for a new method of evaluation of the newborn infant.

Authors:  V APGAR
Journal:  Curr Res Anesth Analg       Date:  1953 Jul-Aug

Review 2.  [Scoring systems in the surgical intensive care unit. I].

Authors:  C Ohmann; W Gross-Weege
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  Discrepancy between medical decisions for individual patients and for groups.

Authors:  D A Redelmeier; A Tversky
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-04-19       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale.

Authors:  G Teasdale; B Jennett
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1974-07-13       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care.

Authors:  S P Baker; B O'Neill; W Haddon; W B Long
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1974-03

6.  APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system.

Authors:  W A Knaus; E A Draper; D P Wagner; J E Zimmerman
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 7.  [Scores as decision aids].

Authors:  G Regel; H C Pape; T Pohlemann; A Seekamp; U Bosch; H Tscherne
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 1.000

8.  [The Mannheim peritonitis index. An instrument for the intraoperative prognosis of peritonitis].

Authors:  M M Linder; H Wacha; U Feldmann; G Wesch; R A Streifensand; E Gundlach
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 0.955

9.  A revision of the Trauma Score.

Authors:  H R Champion; W J Sacco; W S Copes; D S Gann; T A Gennarelli; M E Flanagan
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1989-05
  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  Invisible scar endoscopic thyroidectomy by the dorsal approach: experimental development of a new technique with human cadavers and preliminary clinical results.

Authors:  Hans Martin Schardey; Stefan Schopf; Michael Kammal; Mirco Barone; Wolfgang Rudert; Thomas Hernandez-Richter; Stefan Pörtl
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-02-23       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  [Results of overlapping sphincter repair in response to obstetric injury].

Authors:  C Kopf; W Haidinger; D Haidinger
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  Relaparotomies: Why is Mortality Higher?

Authors:  Ercan Gedik; Kazým Söylemez; Sadullah Girgin; Ersin Uysal; Ýbrahim Taçyýldýz
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2009-05-12       Impact factor: 3.693

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.