Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30848161›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurotrauma2021

Apolipoprotein E4 Polymorphism and Outcomes from Traumatic Brain Injury: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Charles A McFadyen, Frederick A Zeiler, Virginia Newcombe, Anneliese Synnot, Ewout Steyerberg, Russel L Gruen, Jonathan Rosand, Aarno Palotie, Andrew I R Maas, David K Menon

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neurotrauma, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 9 countries.

Charles A McFadyenDivision of Anesthesia, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Frederick A ZeilerDivision of Anesthesia, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Virginia NewcombeDivision of Anesthesia, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Anneliese SynnotCenter for Excellence in Traumatic Brain Injury Research, National Trauma Research Institute, Monash University, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Ewout SteyerbergDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Russel L GruenNTU Institute for Health Technologies and Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Jonathan RosandStroke Service, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Aarno PalotieDepartment of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Andrew I R MaasDepartment of Neurosurgery, Antwerp University Hospital and University of Antwerp, Edegem, Belgium.
David K MenonDivision of Anesthesia, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
University of Cambridge · GBBroad Institute · USHarvard University · USLa Trobe University · AULeiden University Medical Center · NLNanyang Technological University · SGUniversity of Antwerp · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mortality of traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been largely static despite advances in monitoring and imaging techniques. Substantial variance exists in outcome, not fully accounted for by baseline characteristics or injury severity, and genetic factors likely play a role in this variance. The aims of this systematic review were to examine the evidence for a link between the apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) polymorphism and TBI outcomes and where possible, to quantify the effect size via meta-analysis. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and gray literature in December 2017. We included studies of APOE genotype in relation to functional adult TBI outcomes. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies Risk of Bias Assessment Instrument and the prognostic studies adaptation of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. In addition, we contacted investigators and included an additional 160 patients whose data had not been made available for previous analyses, giving a total sample size of 2593 patients. Meta-analysis demonstrated higher odds of a favorable outcome following TBI in those not possessing an ApoE ɛ4 allele compared with ɛ4 carriers and homozygotes (odds ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.84;

Indexed as

Apolipoprotein E4Brain Injuries, TraumaticHumansPolymorphism, Single NucleotideTreatment OutcomeApolipoprotein E4geneticsliving systematic reviewsoutcomeprognosistraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID30848161
PMCPMC8054520
OpenAlexW2921483182

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.