Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35533263›Full record

Trial reportThe neuroradiology journal2023

Accuracy of head computed tomography scoring systems in predicting outcomes for patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A ProTECT III ancillary study.

Haijun Wu, David W Wright, Jason W Allen, Victoria Ding, Derek Boothroyd, Olena Y Glushakova, Ron Hayes, Bin Jiang, Max Wintermark

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The neuroradiology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Haijun WuDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
David W WrightDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Jason W AllenDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Victoria DingDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Derek BoothroydDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Olena Y GlushakovaDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Ron HayesDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Bin JiangDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Max WintermarkDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6726-3951

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral types of head CT classification systems have been developed to prognosticate and stratify TBI patients.

objectiveThe purpose of our study was to compare the predictive value and accuracy of the different CT scoring systems, including the Marshall, Rotterdam, Stockholm, Helsinki, and NIRIS systems, to inform specific patient management actions, using the ProTECT III population of patients with moderate to severe acute traumatic brain injury (TBI).

methodsWe used the data collected in the patients with moderate to severe (GCS score of 4-12) TBI enrolled in the ProTECT III clinical trial. ProTECT III was a NIH-funded, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial designed to determine the efficacy of early administration of IV progesterone. The CT scoring systems listed above were applied to the baseline CT scans obtained in the trial. We assessed the predictive accuracy of these scoring systems with respect to Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended at 6 months, disability rating scale score, and mortality.

resultsA total of 882 subjects were enrolled in ProTECT III. Worse scores for each head CT scoring systems were highly correlated with unfavorable outcome, disability outcome, and mortality. The NIRIS classification was more strongly correlated than the Stockholm and Rotterdam CT scores, followed by the Helsinki and Marshall CT classification. The highest correlation was observed between NIRIS and mortality (estimated odds ratios of 4.83).

conclusionAll scores were highly associated with 6-month unfavorable, disability and mortality outcomes. NIRIS was also accurate in predicting TBI patients' management and disposition.

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticGlasgow Coma ScaleHumansPrognosisProspective StudiesTomography Scanners, X-Ray ComputedTomography, X-Ray ComputedClinical decision supportcommon data elements CToutcomeTBI

Identifiers

PMID35533263
PMCPMC9893165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.