Observational studyInternal and emergency medicine2026
The role of two brain injury biomarkers, GFAP and UCH-L1, for the management of mTBI in the Emergency Department: an observational study.
Observational study in Internal and emergency medicine, 2026. 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.
- Blood-based biomarkers GFAP/UCH-L1 for the diagnosis of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI): a single-center implementation experience.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Age- and Sex-Related Differences in GFAP and UCH-L1 Levels in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Blood RNA Signatures Enable Accurate Discrimination of Stroke Subtype and Onset Time at Hospital Admission.Research square · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The management of the Emergency Department (ED) of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is currently challenging due to its clinical heterogeneity. The most rapid method to assess brain damage is to perform a brain computed tomography (CT) scan. Stratification scores, as the Canadian CT Head Rule or the New Orleans Criteria, can be used for a quick and safe rule-out for mTBI, but scientific literature highlights how these scores are misused in real life leading to perform useless brain CT scans with radiation exposure, even in patients who do not need it. In the last years, some scientific associations have suggested the use of a biomarker to help clinicians in decision-making in this field. Given these premises, in this study we evaluated the effectiveness of two biomarkers, the glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and the ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1), in predicting the necessity of performing a CT scan of the brain in the study population calculated as Negative Predictive Value (NPV) compared to CT scan reports. From January 2023, we enrolled 101 participants with mTBI who underwent a brain CT scan and blood test to assess levels of two biomarkers at the ED of Policlinico Teaching Hospital of Catania, Italy. 17 participants had a positive brain CT scan report. Of these, 13 reported an "elevated" levels of biomarkers, and 4 a "not elevated" levels leading to an NPV of 86.6%. A specialist neuroradiologist reassessed, in blind, all CT scans leading to the re-evaluation of 9 CT scans, initially reported as positive by the ED radiologist, which were then reassessed as negative. The results yielded an NPV of 100%. Our study suggests that GFAP and UCH-L1 can be effectively used in the management of patients with mTBI for a rapid and safe rule-out of the patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40465052What 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.