ArticleNeurocritical care2022
Modeling Brain-Heart Crosstalk Information in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting neurological recovery following cardiac arrest based on dynamic brain-heart coupling.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Cross-modal synchronization of EEG and ECG reveals hidden signatures of recovery in traumatic brain injury.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Advances in cellular and molecular mechanisms of trauma-induced organ inflammation and dysfunction.Burns & trauma · 2026Review
- Clinical utility of jugular venous blood gas biomarkers for assessing cranial brain injury severity and predicting ICU stay duration: A biochemical and predictive modeling approach.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2025Article
- Dynamic assessment of signal entropy for prognostication and secondary brain insult detection after traumatic brain injury.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- Exploration of simultaneous transients between cerebral hemodynamics and the autonomic nervous system using windowed time-lagged cross-correlation matrices: a CENTER-TBI study.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Article
- Refining outcome prediction after traumatic brain injury with machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Crosstalk Between the Nervous System and Systemic Organs in Acute Brain Injury.Neurocritical care · 2024Review
- Eight rules for the haemodynamic management of traumatic brain-injured patients.European journal of anaesthesiology and intensive care · 2023Article
- Predictive factors for cerebrocardiac syndrome in patients with severe traumatic brain injury: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Leveraging Continuous Vital Sign Measurements for Real-Time Assessment of Autonomic Nervous System Dysfunction After Brain Injury: A Narrative Review of Current and Future Applications.Neurocritical care · 2022Review
- LASSO Regression Modeling on Prediction of Medical Terms among Seafarers' Health Documents Using Tidy Text Mining.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is an extremely heterogeneous and complex pathology that requires the integration of different physiological measurements for the optimal understanding and clinical management of patients. Information derived from intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring can be coupled with information obtained from heart rate (HR) monitoring to assess the interplay between brain and heart. The goal of our study is to investigate events of simultaneous increases in HR and ICP and their relationship with patient mortality..
methodsIn our previous work, we introduced a novel measure of brain-heart interaction termed brain-heart crosstalks (ct
resultsA total of 226 patients with TBI were included in this cohort. The data set included monitored parameters (ICP and HR), as well as laboratory, demographics, and clinical information. The number of detected brain-heart crosstalks varied (mean 58, standard deviation 57). The Kruskal-Wallis test comparing brain-heart crosstalks measures of survivors and nonsurvivors showed statistically significant differences between the two distributions (p values: 0.02 for [Formula: see text], 0.005 for ct
conclusionsThe presence of a negative relationship between mortality and brain-heart crosstalks indicators suggests that a healthy brain-cardiovascular interaction plays a role in TBI.
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.