ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2017
Utility of repeat head computed tomography after mild head trauma: influence on short- and long-term prognosis and health-related quality of life.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence-based indications for repeat head CT after mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Overuse of computed tomography for mild head injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- The Risk of Deterioration in GCS13-15 Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury Identified by Computed Tomography Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of neurotrauma · 2018Pooled it
- Hospital admission of older patients with mild traumatic brain injury and traumatic intracranial hemorrhage: is it always necessary?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Clinical Indicators for Primary Cranial CT Imaging after Mild Traumatic Brain Injury-A Retrospective Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of repeat head CT in a large population of patients with non-isolated blunt mild head trauma (MTBI), especially in the presence of intracranial injury. This is a study of a cohort of 478 non-isolated MTBI patients admitted to the High Dependency Unit of the Emergency Department of the University-Hospital of Florence from July 2008 to December 2013. Results of initial and subsequent head CT scans, and indications for repeat head CT scan (routine vs. neurologic change) were recorded. The study population was divided into two subgroups: 28 (6 %) patients with neurological change or persistently reduced GCS (group GCS-) and 450 (94 %) patients with normal or improving GCS (group GCS+). After 6 months from the event, a telephone interview using SF12 questionnaire was conducted. Among GCS- patients, the admission CT scan showed intracranial lesions (ICI) in 16 (57 %) patients; only two patients had a TBI-related neurosurgical intervention. Among GCS+ patients, the first CT scan showed an ICI in 133 patients; in a significant proportion of patients with ICI at the first CT scan, the injury worsened (40/133, 30 %, p < 0.0001). However, no GCS+ patient had any neurosurgical intervention. We observed a significant reduction in both MCS and PCS scores after the injury compared with the previous period. The number of repeat CT scan was high in patients who presented ICI at the first CT scan; however, no patient with ICI and normal or improving GCS score needed a neurosurgical intervention.
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.