ArticleBrain sciences2023
Comparing Predictive Utility of Head Computed Tomography Scan-Based Scoring Systems for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Marshall CT Scores with GFAP, UCH-L1, Tau, NfL, and p-Tau231 After Traumatic Brain Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Traumatic Brain Injury Severity Using the Abbreviated Injury Scale and the Injury Severity Score: A Retrospective Study in Two Eastern European Centers.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Deciphering the effectiveness of computed tomography scoring systems in improving mortality prediction for traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis.Journal of trauma and injury · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study compared the predictive utility of Marshall, Rotterdam, Stockholm, Helsinki, and NeuroImaging Radiological Interpretation System (NIRIS) scorings based on early non-contrast brain computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). The area under a receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to determine the predictive utility of scoring systems. Subgroup analyses were performed among patients with head AIS scores > 1. A total of 996 patients were included, of whom 786 (78.9%) were males. In-hospital mortality, ICU admission, neurosurgical intervention, and prolonged total hospital length of stay (THLOS) were recorded for 27 (2.7%), 207 (20.8%), 82 (8.2%), and 205 (20.6%) patients, respectively. For predicting in-hospital mortality, all scoring systems had AUROC point estimates above 0.9 and 0.75 among all included patients and patients with head AIS > 1, respectively, without any significant differences. The Marshall and NIRIS scoring systems had higher AUROCs for predicting ICU admission and neurosurgery than the other scoring systems. For predicting THLOS ≥ seven days, although the NIRIS and Marshall scoring systems seemed to have higher AUROC point estimates when all patients were analyzed, five scoring systems performed roughly the same in the head AIS > 1 subgroup.
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.