Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28963310›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2017

Characteristics of patients included and enrolled in studies on the prognostic value of serum biomarkers for prediction of postconcussion symptoms following a mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review.

Eric Mercier, Pier-Alexandre Tardif, Marcel Emond, Marie-Christine Ouellet, Élaine de Guise, Biswadev Mitra, Peter Cameron, Natalie Le Sage

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Unveiling the predictive power of biomarkers in traumatic brain injury: A narrative review focused on clinical outcomes.Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Acute findings in an acquired neurosensory dysfunction.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Eric MercierAxe Santé des Populations et Pratiques Optimales en Santé, Unité de recherche en Traumatologie - Urgence - Soins Intensifs, Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4365-2220
Pier-Alexandre TardifAxe Santé des Populations et Pratiques Optimales en Santé, Unité de recherche en Traumatologie - Urgence - Soins Intensifs, Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.
Marcel EmondDépartement de Médecine Familiale et Médecine d'Urgence, Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.
Marie-Christine OuelletCentre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche en Réadaptation et Intégration Sociale (CIRRIS), Quebec, Canada.
Élaine de GuiseResearch-Institute, McGill University Health Centre, Quebec, Canada.
Biswadev MitraEmergency and Trauma Centre, The Alfred Hospital, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Peter CameronEmergency and Trauma Centre, The Alfred Hospital, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Natalie Le SageAxe Santé des Populations et Pratiques Optimales en Santé, Unité de recherche en Traumatologie - Urgence - Soins Intensifs, Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has been insufficiently researched, and its definition remains elusive. Investigators are confronted by heterogeneity in patients, mechanism of injury and outcomes. Findings are thus often limited in generalisability and clinical application. Serum protein biomarkers are increasingly assessed to enhance prognostication of outcomes, but their translation into clinical practice has yet to be achieved. A systematic review was performed to describe the adult populations included and enrolled in studies that evaluated the prognostic value of protein biomarkers to predict postconcussion symptoms following an mTBI. DATA SOURCES: Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycBITE and PsycINFO up to October 2016. DATA SELECTION AND EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened for potentially eligible studies, extracted data and assessed the overall quality of evidence by outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

resultsA total of 23 298 citations were obtained from which 166 manuscripts were reviewed. Thirty-six cohort studies (2812 patients) having enrolled between 7 and 311 patients (median 89) fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Most studies excluded patients based on advanced age (n=10 (28%)), neurological disorders (n=20 (56%)), psychiatric disorders (n=17 (47%)), substance abuse disorders (n=13 (36%)) or previous traumatic brain injury (n=10 (28%)). Twenty-one studies (58%) used at least two of these exclusion criteria. The pooled mean age of included patients was 39.3 (SD 4.6) years old (34 studies). The criteria used to define a mTBI were inconsistent. The most frequently reported outcome was postconcussion syndrome using the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (n=18 (50%)) with follow-ups ranging from 7 days to 5 years after the mTBI.

conclusionsMost studies have recruited samples that are not representative and generalisable to the mTBI population. These exclusion criteria limit the potential use and translation of promising serum protein biomarkers to predict postconcussion symptoms.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBrain ConcussionHumansPost-Concussion SyndromePrognosisTrauma Severity IndicesBiomarkersbiomarkerspost-concussion symptomspost-concussion syndromesystematic reviewtraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID28963310
PMCPMC5623519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.