ArticleChild abuse & neglect2024
Validation of the PediBIRN-7 clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Article in Child abuse & neglect, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Medical findings in young patients with head trauma: How strong is the evidence for abuse?International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe PediBIRN-7 clinical prediction rule incorporates the (positive or negative) predictive contributions of completed abuse evaluations to estimate abusive head trauma (AHT) probability after abuse evaluation. Applying definitional criteria as proxies for AHT and non-AHT ground truth, it performed with sensitivity 0.73 (95 % CI: 0.66-0.79), specificity 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.82-0.90), and ROC-AUC 0.88 (95 % CI: 0.85-0.92) in its derivation study.
objectiveTo validate the PediBIRN-7's AHT prediction performance in a novel, equivalent, patient population. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGS: Consecutive, acutely head-injured children <3 years hospitalized for intensive care across eight sites between 2017 and 2020 with completed skeletal surveys and retinal exams (N = 342).
methodsSecondary analysis of an existing, cross-sectional, prospective dataset, including assignment of patient-specific estimates of AHT probability, calculation of AHT prediction performance measures (ROC-AUC, sensitivity, specificity, predictive values), and completion of sensitivity analyses to estimate best- and worst-case prediction performances.
resultsApplying the same definitional criteria, the PediBIRN-7 performed with sensitivity 0.74 (95 % CI: 0.66-0.81), specificity 0.77 (95 % CI: 0.70-0.83), and ROC-AUC 0.83 (95 % CI: 0.78-0.88). The reduction in ROC-AUC was statistically insignificant (p = .07). Applying physicians' final consensus diagnoses as proxies for AHT and non-AHT ground truth, the PediBIRN-7 performed with sensitivity 0.73 (95 % CI: 0.66-0.79), specificity 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.82-0.90), and ROC-AUC 0.90 (95 % CI: 0.87-0.94). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated minimal changes in rule performance.
conclusionThe PediBIRN-7's overall AHT prediction performance has been validated in a novel, equivalent, patient population. Its patient-specific estimates of AHT probability can inform physicians' AHT-related diagnostic reasoning after abuse evaluation.
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.