ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2024
Consideration of Brain CT Imaging Standard for Mild Head Injuries.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been reported that various clinical criteria indicate computed tomography (CT) examination for mild head injury (MHI). However, the decision to perform CT for MHI largely depends on the physician. Data on severe head injuries is available in sources such as the Japan Neurotrauma Data Bank, but only a few data has been collected on MHI. A total of 1688 patients with MHI (Glasgow Coma Scale 14 and 15) treated at our hospital from June 2017 to May 2019 were reviewed. CT was performed in 1237 patients (73.28%), and intracranial hemorrhage was detected in 50 patients. Three patients deteriorated, and all were surgically treated. Statistical analysis of the presence or absence of acute intracranial hemorrhage and "risk factors for complications of intracranial lesions in MHI" showed significant differences in unclear or ambiguous accident history (p = 0.022), continued post-traumatic amnesia (p < 0.01), trauma above the clavicles including clinical signs of skull fracture (skull base or depressed skull fracture) (p = 0.012), age <60 years (p < 0.01), coagulation disorders (p < 0.01), and alcohol or drug intoxication (p < 0.01). The 453 patients who did not satisfy these risk factors included only one patient with intracranial hemorrhage, so the negative predictive value was 99.78%. This study shows that the "risk factors for complications of intracranial lesions in MHI" are effective criteria for excluding acute intracranial hemorrhage and CT should be actively considered for patients with the above factors that showed significant differences.
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.