ArticleBMJ open2022
Towards PErsonalised PRognosis for children with traumatic brain injury: the PEPR study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Analyses in Patient-Derived Neurons Establish Pathogenicity forHuman mutation · 2026Article
- Dimensionality reduction of quantitative EEG and clinical profiles uncover associations with monogenic neurodevelopmental phenotypes in SNAREopathies.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTraumatic brain injury (TBI) in children can be associated with poor outcome in crucial functional domains, including motor, neurocognitive and behavioural functioning. However, outcome varies between patients and is mediated by complex interplay between demographic factors, premorbid functioning and (sub)acute clinical characteristics. At present, methods to understand let alone predict outcome on the basis of these variables are lacking, which contributes to unnecessary follow-up as well as undetected impairments in children. Therefore, this study aims to develop prognostic models for the individual outcome of children with TBI in a range of important developmental domains. In addition, the potential added value of advanced neuroimaging data and the use of machine learning algorithms in the development of prognostic models will be assessed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 210 children aged 4-18 years diagnosed with mild-to-severe TBI will be prospectively recruited from a research network of Dutch hospitals. They will be matched 2:1 to a control group of neurologically healthy children (n=105). Predictors in the model will include demographic, premorbid and clinical measures prospectively registered from the TBI hospital admission onwards as well as MRI metrics assessed at 1 month post-injury. Outcome measures of the prognostic models are (1) motor functioning, (2) intelligence, (3) behavioural functioning and (4) school performance, all assessed at 6 months post-injury. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics has been obtained from the Medical Ethical Board of the Amsterdam UMC (location AMC). Findings of our multicentre prospective study will enable clinicians to identify TBI children at risk and aim towards a personalised prognosis. Lastly, findings will be submitted for publication in open access, international and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL71283.018.19 and NL9051.
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.