Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35509585›Full record

ArticleSurgical neurology international2022

A scoping review on the challenges, improvement programs, and relevant output metrics for neurotrauma services in major trauma centers.

Davor Dasic, Lucy Morgan, Amir Panezai, Nikolaos Syrmos, Gianfranco K I Ligarotti, Ismail Zaed, Salvatore Chibbaro, Tariq Khan, Lara Prisco, Mario Ganau

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical neurology international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

Davor DasicDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool.
Lucy MorganSchool of Health and Care Professions, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth.
Amir PanezaiDivision of Neurosciences, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Nikolaos SyrmosSchool of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Gianfranco K I LigarottiFondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico "Carlo Besta", Milano.
Ismail ZaedDepartment of Neurosurgery, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Salvatore ChibbaroDivision of Neurosurgery, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
Tariq KhanNorth West General Hospital and Research Centre, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Lara PriscoNeuro Intensive Care Unit, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Mario GanauDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: For a neurotrauma unit to be defined as a structured neurotrauma service (NS) the following criteria must be satisfied: A dedicated neurointensive care unit, endovascular neuroradiology, in-hospital neurorehabilitation unit and helicopter platform within the context of a Level I trauma center. Designing an effective NS can be challenging, particularly when considering the different priorities and resources of countries across the globe. In addition the impact on clinical outcomes is not clearly established. Methods: A scoping review of the literature spanning from 2000 to 2020 meant to identify protocols, guidelines, and best practices for the management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in NS was conducted on the US National Library of Medicine and National Institute of Health databases. Results: Limited evidence is available regarding quantitative and qualitative metrics to assess the impact of NSs and specialist follow-up clinics on patients' outcome. Of note, the available literature used to lack detailed reports for: (a) Geographical clusters, such as low-to-middle income countries (LMIC); (b) clinical subgroups, such as mild TBI; and (c) long-term management, such as rehabilitation services. Only in the last few years more attention has been paid to those research topics. Conclusion: NSs can positively impact the management of the broad spectrum of TBI in different clinical settings; however more research on patients' outcomes and quality of life metrics is needed to establish their efficacy. The collaboration of global clinicians and the development of international guidelines applicable also to LMIC are warranted.

Indexed as

Clinical outcome measuresGlobal neurosurgeryGuidelinesHead injuryMajor trauma centerNeurotrauma

Identifiers

PMID35509585
PMCPMC9062973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.