ReviewBrain & spine2026
Decision-Making in Neurotrauma: a multidimensional model of cognitive and contextual factors influencing surgical judgment in the acute care setting.
Review in Brain & spine, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Surgical decision-making in acute neurotrauma settings is a cognitively complex process shaped by multiple factors beyond neuroimaging and clinical examination. Despite established evidence-based guidelines for traumatic brain injury (TBI) management, significant variability in surgical practice persists globally. Understanding the cognitive and contextual determinants of surgical judgment is essential for improving outcomes and neurosurgical education. Research question: What cognitive and contextual factors shape surgical decision-making in neurotrauma, and how can a hippocampal-prefrontal cortex model informs strategies to improve judgment and reduce practice variability? Material and methods: This narrative review integrates knowledge from cognitive neuroscience, surgical decision-making research, and clinical neurotrauma management. We apply a validated algorithmic model based on hippocampal-prefrontal cortex (PFC) interaction to neurosurgical TBI decision-making, analyzing both information sources available to the surgeon and surgeon-specific contextual modulators shaping the final clinical judgment. Results: Surgical decisions in neurotrauma are influenced by two factor categories: (1) hippocampal inputs (clinical experience, published evidence, guidelines, expert consensus, bioethical considerations, neuromonitoring data, and neuroimaging), each carrying variable cognitive bias; and (2) PFC modulators (risk-benefit analysis, emotional state, work environment, fatigue, and level of training), which determine how information is weighted and transformed into action. Evidence-based protocols provide structured decision anchors, but their implementation remains subject to the surgeon's interpretive and contextual filters. Discussion and conclusion: A multidimensional, neuroscience-informed model of surgical decision-making in neurotrauma has practical implications for training, quality improvement, and decision-support tool development. Recognizing cognitive biases, incorporating objective neuromonitoring data, and standardizing decision frameworks are key strategies for optimizing surgical outcomes in TBI.
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.