ArticleIntensive care medicine1988
Serial recordings of auditory brainstem responses in severe head injury: relationship between test timing and prognostic power.
Article in Intensive care medicine, 1988. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Coma. The prognostic value of evoked potentials in patients after traumatic brain injury].Der Anaesthesist · 2006Review
- Brainstem auditory evoked potentials during procaine toxicity in dogs.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 1992Article
- Short latency evoked potentials: new criteria for brain death?Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 1990Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ABRs have proved to be very accurate prognostic indicators in severe head injury, even when predictions are based on single ABR recordings. In this study we submitted 30 severely head-injured patients to serial ABR recordings (during the clinical course of posttraumatic coma) in order to verify whether the ABR prognostic power may depend on test timing in relation to the injury. 15 patients (50%) died, 5 (16.7%) remained vegetative, 2 (6.6%) severely disabled and 8 (26.7%) recovered. All recovered patients had normal ABR throughout clinical course, while severely disabled and vegetative patients showed at least transently ABR abnormalities (namely, an interpeak latency of waves V-I greater than 4.48 ms). Among dead patients, 8 showed steady and 3 transient ABR abnormalities during the clinical course, while 2 of 3 patients with normal ABR dead from extracranial complications. ABRs were significantly related to the outcome at any time, but gave more accurate prognostic indications on days 3-6 after the injury. The use of serial ABR recordings appeared to improve the outcome predictions in comparison with single ABR tests. Finally our result confirm the previously reported existance of a breakpoint between reversible brainstem dysfunction and irreversible brainstem damage defined by an IPL V-I of about 4.50 ms.
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.