ArticleBrain & spine2025
Validation of the Scandinavian neurotrauma committee guidelines - A retrospective study in region Örebro county.
Article in Brain & spine, 2025. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is a global health concern and a leading cause of trauma-related death worldwide. Computed tomography (CT) scan is the gold standard for screening for intracranial bleeding following TBI. Most cases of TBI are mild, with negative CT scans. Different instruments and guidelines are employed to better predict which patients need a CT scan and to minimise unnecessary radiation exposure and save resources. One such instrument is the Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee guidelines. Research question: To validate and examine adherence to the Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee guidelines in Region Örebro County. Material and methods: We executed a retrospective study with review of patient records and data analysis. Descriptive and comparative statistics were used, along with binary logistic regression analysis to account for confounding factors. Results: A total of 505 cases were reviewed. Sensitivity of the guidelines was measured at 95% with specificity at 29%. The positive and negative predictive values were 0.77 and 0.69, respectively. A total of 17 false negative cases were found. One case required surgery, during which a chronic subdural hematoma was identified. Adherence to guidelines was 56%, with the lack of analysis of S100B primarily accounting for non-adherence. A total of 54 CT scans were performed outside of guideline indications. Discussion and conclusions: The guidelines can effectively predict which patients need a CT scan. Increased adherence could potentially decrease the number of CT scans, while inclusion of older age limit as an independent rule-in law for CT scans would increase patient safety.
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.