ArticleThe journal of trauma and acute care surgery2026
Tracking the big picture during wartime: A national trauma registry perspective.
Article in The journal of trauma and acute care surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrauma registries are a core component of modern trauma systems for surveillance, quality improvement, and research. During armed conflicts, the need for timely, population-level data increases; however, the functioning of national trauma registries during active war has been sparsely described. This study describes the performance of Israel's National Trauma Registry (INTR) during the 2023-2025 Swords of Iron War, and reports key wartime injury epidemiology alongside the central operational processes implemented to support both civilian and military health care systems.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of all hospitalized civilian and military casualties with war-associated injuries recorded in the INTR between October 7, 2023, and July 31, 2025. The primary analysis focused on descriptive epidemiology and clinical outcomes, while a secondary descriptive component addressed operational adaptations of the national trauma registry during the conflict.
resultsA total of 4,317 war-related trauma casualties were recorded, including 3,071 military personnel (71.1%) and 1,246 civilians (28.9%). Admissions peaked during the initial 48 to 72 hours of the war. Military casualties more frequently sustained penetrating injuries, with a higher proportion of critical injury (ISS ≥25) compared with civilians (10.8% vs. 5.8%). Serious thoracic, abdominal, facial, and upper-extremity injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale≥3) were more common among military personnel; civilians exhibited a higher burden of lower-extremity trauma. More than half of all casualties underwent operative intervention, one-fifth of military casualties required intensive care, and overall in-hospital mortality remained low (~2%).
conclusionsINTR maintained continuous, high-quality surveillance of casualties throughout the Swords of Iron War. Through targeted operational and methodological adaptations, the registry enabled real-time characterization of evolving wartime injury patterns, system burden, and outcomes, while supporting clinical and policy decisions under extreme conditions. These findings highlight the critical role of national trauma registries for trauma system management during armed conflicts. ( J Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2026;101: S122-S130. Copyright © 2026 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/Epidemiologic; Level IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.