ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2025
An evaluation and comparison of traumatic brain injury data sources within the VA Million Veteran Program: A descriptive epidemiological study.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2025. 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.
- Examining the additive risk of TBI and comorbid conditions on dementia in military veterans: a retrospective cohort study.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Article
- Traumatic Brain Injury and High Combat Exposure Pose Additive Risk for Specific Chronic Health Conditions in Veterans Affairs Million Veteran Program Enrollees.Journal of neurotrauma · 2026Article
- Identification of a subgroup of post-9/11 veterans with unique combat experiences and worse clinical outcomes.Psychiatry research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the increased use and availability of electronic health record (EHR) data, population-based traumatic brain injury (TBI) research has received growing attention. However, a key challenge emerging from this research has been accurate ascertainment of TBI case/control status. While International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnosis codes constitute a widely used source of data, their validity may vary by clinic and provider. Examining other TBI data sources from epidemiological databases may help ascertain the value of ICD codes. Within the VA Million Veteran Program (MVP), TBI data is available from several data sources. The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of TBI data sources available within MVP and to evaluate the performance characteristics of these variables. Analyses included up to 657,790 MVP-enrolled Veterans. TBI status (i.e., "TBI" vs. "No TBI") was examined using several different variables: two variables from the MVP Baseline Survey; one variable from the MVP Lifestyle Survey; TBI ICD codes; and two variables from the VA TBI Screening and Evaluation Program. Several key findings emerged: (1) the availability of TBI data varied across data sources; (2) there were significant differences in TBI prevalence by sex, ancestry, and military service era for all TBI variables; (3) sensitivity and specificity varied considerably across TBI variables; and (4) combining TBI data sources (e.g., defining a TBI case using ICD codes and survey data) resulted in variables with stronger performance characteristics. Findings speak to the power of combining multiple data sources when retrospectively assessing TBI in the EHR.
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.