ArticlePloS one2017
The aggressiveness of neurotrauma practitioners and the influence of the IMPACT prognostic calculator.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic Models in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Neurocritical care · 2022Pooled it
- Patterns in withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in trauma patients with and without moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: an ACS-TQIP retrospective cohort study.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026Article
- Computational Prognostic Modeling in Traumatic Brain Injury.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- Comparative analysis of CRASH and IMPACT in predicting the outcome of 340 patients with traumatic brain injury.Translational neuroscience · 2024Article
- Performance of CRASH and IMPACT Prognostic Models for Traumatic Brain Injury at 12 and 24 Months Post-Injury.Neurotrauma reports · 2023Article
- Outcome Prediction in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Using Deep Learning from Head CT Scans.Radiology · 2022Article
- Surgical decision making in the setting of severe traumatic brain injury: A survey of neurosurgeons.PloS one · 2020Article
- Should we have a guard against therapeutic nihilism for patients with severe traumatic brain injury?Neural regeneration research · 2017Article
- Inpatient Metabolic Panel Trajectories Improve 6-Month Mortality Prognostication after Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurotrauma reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Published guidelines have helped to standardize the care of patients with traumatic brain injury; however, there remains substantial variation in the decision to pursue or withhold aggressive care. The International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT) prognostic calculator offers the opportunity to study and decrease variability in physician aggressiveness. The authors wish to understand how IMPACT's prognostic calculations currently influence patient care and to better understand physician aggressiveness. The authors conducted an anonymous international, multidisciplinary survey of practitioners who provide care to patients with traumatic brain injury. Questions were designed to determine current use rates of the IMPACT prognostic calculator and thresholds of age and risk for death or poor outcome that might cause practitioners to consider withholding aggressive care. Correlations between physician aggressiveness, putative predictors of aggressiveness, and demographics were examined. One hundred fifty-four responses were received, half of which were from physicians who were familiar with the IMPACT calculator. The most frequent use of the calculator was to improve communication with patients and their families. On average, respondents indicated that in patients older than 76 years or those with a >85% chance of death or poor outcome it might be reasonable to pursue non-aggressive care. These thresholds were robust and were not influenced by provider or institutional characteristics. This study demonstrates the need to educate physicians about the IMPACT prognostic calculator. The consensus values for age and prognosis identified in our study may be explored in future studies aimed at reducing variability in physician aggressiveness and should not serve as a basis for withdrawing care.
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.