Observational studyJAMA network open2022
Comparative Effectiveness of Diversion of Cerebrospinal Fluid for Children With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.
Observational study in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracranial pressure physiology, monitoring and individualized management in the acute brain injured patient.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Paediatric traumatic brain injury: unique population and unique challenges.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Predicting intracranial pressure monitor placement in children with traumatic brain injury: a prospective cohort study to develop a clinical decision support tool.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Observational
- Severe Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury Presenting Characteristics: Abusive Versus Accidental Trauma.Journal of neurotrauma · 2025Article
- Quantity of Caloric Support After Pediatric Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Description of Associated Outcomes in a Single Retrospective Center Cohort, 2010-2022.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2025Article
- MRI and Clinical Variables for Prediction of Outcomes After Pediatric Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.JAMA network open · 2024Observational
- Multi-modal MRI of hippocampal morphometry and connectivity after pediatric severe TBI.Brain imaging and behavior · 2024Article
- Elucidating a genomic signature associated with behavioral and executive function after moderate to severe pediatric TBI: a systems biology informed approach.Frontiers in systems biology · 2024Article
- Intracranial Pressure and Its Related Parameters in the Management of Severe Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury.Advances in neurobiology · 2024Review
- An update on pediatric traumatic brain injury.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023Review
- Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.The Lancet. Neurology · 2022Review
- Errors in Abstract and Main Text Results.JAMA network open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
22 authors at 14 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Diversion of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) has been used for decades as a treatment for children with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and is recommended by evidenced-based guidelines. However, these recommendations are based on limited studies. Objective: To determine whether CSF diversion is associated with improved Glasgow Outcome Score-Extended for Pediatrics (GOS-EP) and decreased intracranial pressure (ICP) in children with severe TBI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational comparative effectiveness study was performed at 51 clinical centers that routinely care for children with severe TBI in 8 countries (US, United Kingdom, Spain, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and India) from February 2014 to September 2017, with follow-up at 6 months after injury (final follow-up, October 22, 2021). Children with severe TBI were included if they had Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores of 8 or lower, had intracranial pressure (ICP) monitor placed on-site, and were aged younger than 18 years. Children were excluded if they were pregnant or an ICP monitor was not placed at the study site. Consecutive children were screened and enrolled, data regarding treatments were collected, and at discharge, consent was obtained for outcomes testing. Propensity matching for pretreatment characteristics was performed to develop matched pairs for primary analysis. Data analyses were completed on April 18, 2022. Exposures: Clinical care followed local standards, including the use of CSF diversion (or not), with patients stratified at the time of ICP monitor placement (CSF group vs no CSF group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was GOS-EP at 6 months, while ICP was considered as a secondary outcome. CSF vs no CSF was treated as an intention-to-treat analysis, and a sensitivity analysis was performed for children who received delayed CSF diversion. Results: A total of 1000 children with TBI were enrolled, including 314 who received CSF diversion (mean [SD] age, 7.18 [5.45] years; 208 [66.2%] boys) and 686 who did not (mean [SD] age, 7.79 [5.33] years; 437 [63.7%] boys). The propensity-matched analysis included 98 pairs. In propensity score-matched analyses, there was no difference between groups in GOS-EP (median [IQR] difference, 0 [-3 to 1]; P = .08), but there was a decrease in overall ICP in the CSF group (mean [SD] difference, 3.97 [0.12] mm Hg; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study, CSF diversion was not associated with improved outcome at 6 months after TBI, but a decrease in ICP was observed. Given the higher quality of evidence generated by this study, current evidence-based guidelines related to CSF diversion should be reconsidered.
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.