Injury Scoring

Then, Now, and Into the 21st Century

Published in: Injury, Volume 50, Issue 1, pages 2–3 (January 2019). doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.11.002

by Turner M. Osler, Laurent G. Glance, Jeffery S. Buzas, David W. Hosmer

Read More

Access further information on this document at Injury

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Accurately predicting the outcomes of injury is an important aspect of the clinical and administrative management of injured patients. But are we close to defining the perfect predictor? Is a perfect predictor even possible?

The urge to prognosticate the outcomes from injury at least as old as the history of medicine. Four thousand years ago the Egyptian physician Imhotep categorized injuries as survivable ("I can heal"), possibly survivable ("I will fight with"), and unsurvivable ("cannot be healed"). In the 20th century continuous measures of the probability of death were developed, but the approach remained unchanged: using past experience to predict outcomes for future patients. In this essay we review the recent history of injury outcome prediction and suggest how the future may play out. We will find that the measure we are currently using (ISS) has outlived its usefulness because that newer, better measures are available. Indeed, it is likely that modern outcome models are about as good as they can be. Further improvements will have to come from improved approaches to injury description and capture.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.