ArticleThe Lancet. Neurology2013
Advancing care for traumatic brain injury: findings from the IMPACT studies and perspectives on future research.
Article in The Lancet. Neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
66 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 169 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-report and caregiver-report measures of rehabilitation service use following acquired brain injury: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Toward a global and reproducible science for brain imaging in neurotrauma: the ENIGMA adult moderate/severe traumatic brain injury working group.Brain imaging and behavior · 2021Pooled it
- Pre-Clinical Testing of Therapies for Traumatic Brain Injury.Journal of neurotrauma · 2018Guideline
- Trial
- Efficacy and safety of cerebrolysin in neurorecovery after moderate-severe traumatic brain injury: results from the CAPTAIN II trial.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2020Trial
- Glasgow Outcome Scale Measures and Impact on Analysis and Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.Journal of neurotrauma · 2019Trial
- Comparative study of outcome measures and analysis methods for traumatic brain injury trials.Journal of neurotrauma · 2015Trial
- Predicting six-month mortality of patients with traumatic brain injury: usefulness of common intensive care severity scores.Critical care (London, England) · 2014Trial
- A Meta-epidemiologic Analysis of Differences in Treatment-Effect Estimates According to Outcome Scale (GOS vs. GOSE) in Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Trials.Neurocritical care · 2026Article
- Cross-modal synchronization of EEG and ECG reveals hidden signatures of recovery in traumatic brain injury.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- PredictiveACS omega · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Temporal characterisation and electrophysiological implications of TBI-induced serine/threonine kinase activity in mouse cortex.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2025Article
- Brain glucose metabolism in patients with traumatic brain injury undergoing rehabilitation: a longitudinal 18F-FDG PET study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- MRI and Clinical Variables for Prediction of Outcomes After Pediatric Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.JAMA network open · 2024Observational
- Critical ICP thresholds in relation to outcome: Is 22 mmHg really the answer?Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Observational
- ApoE Mimetic Peptides as Therapy for Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023Review
- Dynamic predictors of in-hospital and 3-year mortality after traumatic brain injury: A retrospective cohort study.American journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.The Lancet. Neurology · 2022Review
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Research in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging for several reasons; in particular, the heterogeneity between patients regarding causes, pathophysiology, treatment, and outcome. Advances in basic science have failed to translate into successful clinical treatments, and the evidence underpinning guideline recommendations is weak. Because clinical research has been hampered by non-standardised data collection, restricted multidisciplinary collaboration, and the lack of sensitivity of classification and efficacy analyses, multidisciplinary collaborations are now being fostered. Approaches to deal with heterogeneity have been developed by the IMPACT study group. These approaches can increase statistical power in clinical trials by up to 50% and are also relevant to other heterogeneous neurological diseases, such as stroke and subarachnoid haemorrhage. Rather than trying to limit heterogeneity, we might also be able to exploit it by analysing differences in treatment and outcome between countries and centres in comparative effectiveness research. This approach has great potential to advance care in patients with TBI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.