SynthesisJournal of neurotrauma2019
Handling of Missing Outcome Data in Traumatic Brain Injury Research: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of neurotrauma, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global research trends, reporting and handling of missing data in observational studies of type 2 diabetes mellitus with mild cognitive impairment from 2020 to 2025: a systematic review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- The reporting and handling of missing data in genetic epidemiological studies of mental health in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review.JCPP advances · 2026Article
- 6-Month Recovery after Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Older Adults: A TRACK-GERI Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: lesion frequency distribution maps and prognostic importance of brain contusions on early MRI.European radiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Antiseizure Medication Prescription Patterns for Treatment of Post-Traumatic Epilepsy.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2025Article
- Vascular Risk Factors and 1-Year Cognitive Change Among Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Prospective Harmonization, Common Data Elements, and Sharing Strategies for Multicenter Pre-Clinical Traumatic Brain Injury Research in the Translational Outcomes Project in Neurotrauma Consortium.Journal of neurotrauma · 2025Article
- Comparison of Trauma Mortality Prediction Models With Updated Survival Risk Ratios in Korea.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Association of Blood-Based Biomarkers and 6-Month Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Mild TBI: A CENTER-TBI Analysis.Neurology · 2025Observational
- Prior Psychiatric Disorder and Post-Traumatic Stress, Depressive and Anxiety Disorder after Traumatic Brain Injury with Glasgow Coma Scale Score 13-15: A TRACK-TBI Study.Neurotrauma reports · 2025Article
- The prognostic importance of traumatic axonal injury on early MRI: the Trondheim TAI-MRI grading and quantitative models.European radiology · 2024Article
- Predicting recovery in patients with mild traumatic brain injury and a normal CT using serum biomarkers and diffusion tensor imaging (CENTER-TBI): an observational cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Observational
- Anisotropy component of DTI reveals long-term neuroinflammation following repetitive mild traumatic brain injury in rats.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- Predicting posttraumatic epilepsy using admission electroencephalography after severe traumatic brain injury.Epilepsia · 2023Article
- Article
- Association of Posttraumatic Epilepsy With Long-term Functional Outcomes in Individuals With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.Neurology · 2023Article
- Feasibility and Utility of a Flexible Outcome Assessment Battery for Longitudinal Traumatic Brain Injury Research: A TRACK-TBI Study.Journal of neurotrauma · 2023Article
- Performance of CRASH and IMPACT Prognostic Models for Traumatic Brain Injury at 12 and 24 Months Post-Injury.Neurotrauma reports · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) research commonly measures long-term functional outcome, but studies often suffer from missing data as patients are lost to follow-up. This review assesses the extent and handling of missing outcome data in the TBI literature and provides a practical guide for future research. Relevant electronic databases were searched from January 1, 2012 to October 27, 2017 for TBI studies that used the Glasgow Outcome Scale or Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS/GOSE) as an outcome measure. Studies were screened and data extracted in line with Cochrane guidance. A total of 195 studies, 21 interventional, 174 observational, with 104,688 patients were included. Using the reported follow-up rates in a mixed model, on average 91% of patients were predicted to return to follow-up at 6 months post-injury, 84% at 1 year, and 69% at 2 years. However, 36% of studies provided insufficient information to determine the number of subjects at each time-point. Of 139 studies that did report missing outcome data, only 50% attempted to identify why data were missing, with just 4 reporting their assumption on the "missingness mechanism." The handling of missing data was heterogeneous, with the most common method being its exclusion from analysis. These results confirm substantial variability in the standard of reporting and handling of missing outcome data in TBI research. We conclude that practical guidance is needed to facilitate meaningful and accurate study interpretation, and therefore propose a framework for the handling of missing outcome data in future TBI research.
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.