Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40200896›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurotrauma2025

Traumatic Brain Injury Diagnostic Interview: Development, Interrater Reliability, and 2-Week Post-Injury Clinical Profiles.

Mary U Simons, Alyssa Maio, Daniel L Huber, John D Corrigan, Nancy Temkin, Marin Darsie, Ryan Kitagawa, John Whyte, Joseph T Giacino, Murray B Stein and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurotrauma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Mary U SimonsDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Alyssa MaioDepartment of Pediatrics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Daniel L HuberDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2079-0647
John D CorriganDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Nancy TemkinDepartments of Neurological Surgery and Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Marin DarsieDepartments of Emergency Medicine, Neurology, & Neurosurgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Ryan KitagawaUniversity of Texas Health Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
John WhyteMoss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Joseph T GiacinoSpaulding Rehabilitation Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7916-9698
Murray B SteinDepartment of Psychiatry and School of Public Health, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Geoffrey T ManleyDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Michael A McCreaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Lindsay D NelsonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5258-953X

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR001436 · NCATS · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI FREED, JULIE K · 2015 to 2025
$47.5M
Improving Patient Classification and Outcome Measurement in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)R01NS110856 · NINDS · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI NELSON, LINDSAY · 2019 to 2023
$3.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001436NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS110856
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because most traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) do not present with objective indicators (e.g., neuroimaging findings) to confirm the diagnosis, clinicians often rely on self- or observer-reporting of alteration of consciousness (AOC; e.g., loss of consciousness [LOC], amnesia, other signs of altered mental status), and symptoms to make diagnoses. Moreover, there is no universal agreement on signs and symptoms to sufficiently diagnose TBI, which leads to variability and ambiguity in how TBI is diagnosed in clinical and research settings. The lack of standardized procedures for the diagnosis of acute TBI is a major challenge that hampers the ability to evaluate and compare TBI studies and advance the science and treatment of TBI. We present a new semi-structured TBI Diagnostic Interview (TBI-DI), developed for prospective TBI research to collect injury information important to verifying eligibility for the diagnosis of TBI. Specifically, the TBI-DI collects patient (and/or witness) reports of head trauma, AOC (including LOC and amnesia), and TBI-related symptomology. We describe the protocol, interrater reliability of the TBI-DI items to the same audio-recorded interview, and observed injury characteristics for interviews conducted at 2 weeks post-injury. The sample comprised 335 interviews (320 self-reported, 10 informant-reported, and 5 both) collected on individuals with TBI who were prospectively recruited from 4 U.S. level 1 trauma centers from 2019 to 2023. Cohen's kappa was calculated to summarize interrater reliability

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticInterviews as TopicAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationProspective StudiesReproducibility of Resultsalterations of consciousnessdiagnostic interviewinterrater reliabilitytraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID40200896
PMCPMC12431677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.