Worldwide, there are 15 established trauma databases collecting data to better understand the patterns of injury and effectiveness of interventions, but interpreting the information is hampered by the varied approaches. The aim of this study was to determine the impact, practices, evolution in design and methods of analysis that are standardised and comparable within registries.

A thematic analysis using a narrative synthesis was used to develop threads for future study and identify the limitations in current practice.

PubMed, Ovid, Scopus and EMBASE were searched on the 2 October 2025. At the same time, ChatGPT (Open artificial intelligence) identified the most cited articles in orthopaedic trauma registries, cross-referencing lists as a form of triangulation to aid in snowballing references.

The review included 174 papers from trials and observational studies that analyse data from established trauma orthopaedic registries published in English.

Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies assessing the papers using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist to assess the observational and cohort studies and the Downs and Black Quality Criteria for the remaining papers.

Outcome measures other than mortality are poorly collected, undermining the value of registries. Trauma patients reported considerable impairment 6 and 12 months after injury. Association between level of trauma care and mortality is evident for major trauma populations, but does not hold for general trauma populations. Level I trauma centres produce improved survival in severely injured, but this association could not be proven for non-fatal outcomes in general populations. There is a disparity between resources allocated to save and salvage cases within major trauma units, and hence, routine cases often have lower priority and delayed care.

There is a need to develop a standardised and reproducible method to evaluate data quality in trauma registries. National performance guidelines and trauma centre audits are integral steps towards optimum results. Routine collection of postinjury outcome measures beyond mortality will enable the development of quality improvement metrics that better reflect patient outcomes.

Eye disease and vision impairment are known to be associated with reduced mental well-being, but less is known about the well-being of people with near-normal levels of vision. Here, we examined the association between self-reported eyesight and mental well-being, controlling for eye disease, mental ill-health and demographic factors, for adults with a wide range of age and vision.

Population-based cross-sectional study.

7705 adults (56% women; median age 49 years, range 16–104 years) who participated in the Health Survey for England 2013, self-reported their eyesight status and completed the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale.

Mental well-being, controlling for self-reported mental ill health, self-reported eye disease, age, sex, socioeconomic group and ethnic origin.

Poorer self-reported eyesight was strongly associated with lower mental well-being (univariate linear model, F_(4,7700)=94.7, p2=0.047). Relative to reporting ‘poor’ vision, each subsequent level of vision predicted better well-being, with the exception of ‘fair’ vision, which was not significantly different from ‘poor’ reported vision. This association remained significant after controlling for self-reported mental ill health, self-reported eye disease, age, sex, socioeconomic group and ethnic origin.

Self-reported eyesight is strongly associated with mental well-being, irrespective of whether people have vision impairment or a diagnosed eye disease. This relationship exists in people with and without mental ill-health. Mental well-being should be considered in people with reduced eyesight, regardless of whether they have a diagnosed eye disease or mental ill-health. Interventions which improve vision may have a positive impact on mental well-being.

Rehablines is a further use databank that was established to efficiently conduct high-quality research into patient characteristics and underlying disease processes, provide insight into treatment effects and efficiency and support personalised treatment in rehabilitation medicine.

Adult patients (age ≥18) receiving rehabilitation care at the University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Rehabilitation, are included. Inclusion is ongoing. As of December 2024, 1080 participants have been included, receiving diverse types of rehabilitation such as neurorehabilitation, orthopaedic rehabilitation, oncology rehabilitation, pain rehabilitation and rehabilitation for chronic illnesses.

The databank enables reuse of a wide array of routinely collected clinical data for research and educational purposes. Data included are from electronic health records, patient-reported outcomes, training equipment and physical measurements. A successful pilot was conducted with the pain rehabilitation team, and the procedure has been implemented across all adult rehabilitation teams.

The databank aims to expand to include paediatric rehabilitation by 2025. Future plans also involve linking data with other national and international databanks to enhance research opportunities and provide comprehensive insights into rehabilitation outcomes.

The Rehablines databank is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06750601) and the UMCG Research Data Catalogue (https://doi.org/10.34760/668fd22e4c7be).