ArticlePloS one2018
Sub-classifying patients with mild traumatic brain injury: A clustering approach based on baseline clinical characteristics and 90-day and 180-day outcomes.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scoping review of secondary studies using the Federal Interagency of Traumatic Brain Injury Research datasets.Brain injury · 2026Article
- Discovery of generalizable TBI phenotypes using multivariate time-series clustering.Computers in biology and medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Can Long-Term Outcomes of Posttraumatic Headache be Predicted?Current pain and headache reports · 2024Review
- Traumatic Brain Injury in the Long-COVID Era.Neurotrauma reports · 2024Review
- Data-driven distillation and precision prognosis in traumatic brain injury with interpretable machine learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A self-supervised learning-based approach to clustering multivariate time-series data with missing values (SLAC-Time): An application to TBI phenotyping.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2023Article
- Development of an Animal Model for Traumatic Brain Injury Augmentation of Heterotopic Ossification in Response to Local Injury.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Prevalence of comorbidities post mild traumatic brain injuries: a traumatic brain injury model systems study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.The Lancet. Neurology · 2022Review
- Modern Learning from Big Data in Critical Care: Primum Non Nocere.Neurocritical care · 2022Article
- Article
- Observational
- Artificial intelligence as an emerging technology in the current care of neurological disorders.Journal of neurology · 2021Review
- Clinical Predictors of 3- and 6-Month Outcome for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with a Negative Head CT Scan in the Emergency Department: A TRACK-TBI Pilot Study.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Translingual Neurostimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Symptoms Due to Mild-to-Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2019Article
- Article
- GCS 15: when mild TBI isn't so mild.Neurological research and practice · 2019Article
- A Cross-Study Analysis for Reproducible Sub-classification of Traumatic Brain Injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe current classification of traumatic brain injury (TBI) into "mild", "moderate", or "severe" does not adequately account for the patient heterogeneity that still exists within each of these categories. The objective of this study was to identify "sub-groups" of mild TBI (mTBI) patients based on data available at the time of the initial post-TBI patient evaluation and to determine if the sub-grouping correlates with patient outcomes at 90 and 180 days post-TBI.
methodsData from patients in the TRACK-TBI Pilot dataset who had a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 13 to 15 at arrival to the Emergency Department and a closed head injury were included. Considering 53 clinical variables that are typically available during the initial evaluation of the patient with mild TBI, sparse heirarchial clustering with cluster quality assessment was used to identify the optimal number of patient sub-groups. Patient sub-groups were then compared for ten outcomes measured at 90 or 180 days post-TBI.
resultsAmongst the 485 patients with mTBI, optimal clustering was based on the inclusion of 12 clinical variables that divided the patients into 5 mild TBI sub-groups. Clinical variables driving the sub-clustering included: gender, employment status, marital status, TBI due to falling, brain CT scan result, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, administration of IV fluids in the Emergency Department, alcohol use, tobacco use, history of neurologic disease, and history of psychiatric disease. These 5 mild TBI sub-groups differed in their 90 day and 180 day outcomes within several domains including global outcomes, persistence of TBI-related symptoms, and neuropsychological impairment.
conclusionsSub-groups of patients with mTBI can be identified according to clinical variables that are relatively easy to obtain at the time of initial patient evaluation. A patient's sub-group assignment is associated with multidimensional patient outcomes at 90 and 180 days. These findings support the notion that there are clinically meaningful subgroups of patients amongst those currently classified as having mTBI.
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.