Mass casualty triage¶
Lerner, E. B., Schwartz, R. B., Coule, P. L., Weinstein, E. S., Cone, D. C., Hunt, R. C., Sasser, S. M., et al. (2008). Mass casualty triage: An evaluation of the data and development of a proposed national guideline. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 2.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Allocation
- The selection criterion in modern START and SALT triage protocols (Lerner et al. 2008) is "expected survival benefit per unit care," a need-and-prognosis-weighted priority rule rather than first-come-first-served or equal split.
This sourceReviews START and develops the SALT mass-casualty triage protocol; the criterion is need-and-prognosis-weighted survival benefit per unit care. SUPPORTS the triage-criterion claim in the mass-casualty example.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Lerner et al. describe SALT as resource-based, aiming for the most good for the most people and focusing on salvageable patients, but give no 'survival benefit per unit care' criterion.
“the goal must change to do the most good for the greatest number of people.”
- The selection criterion in modern START and SALT triage protocols (Lerner et al. 2008) is "expected survival benefit per unit care," a need-and-prognosis-weighted priority rule rather than first-come-first-served or equal split.
- Sacrifice Periphery To Defend Core
- The same shape governs graceful degradation in software, mass-casualty triage's decision to forgo the expectant category, and the rhetorical concession of peripheral claims to consolidate an argument's center.
This sourceReviews mass-casualty triage systems (SALT) including the 'expectant' category — forgoing treatment of the unsalvageable to preserve scarce resources for survivable patients.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
The review supports the expectant-category part: resources go to salvageable patients, not to those unlikely to survive. It does not cover software or rhetoric.
“This methodology allows providers to focus resources on potentially salvageable patients rather than applying resuscitation resources to those who are unlikely to survive.”
- The same shape governs graceful degradation in software, mass-casualty triage's decision to forgo the expectant category, and the rhetorical concession of peripheral claims to consolidate an argument's center.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 2 of 2 citations: 2 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:5e365379b0ae · see in the full table