ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
Predicting psychiatric drug initiation after craniectomy: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Psychiatric morbidity following craniectomy remains underexplored, with physical disability outcome measures forming the mainstay of follow-up tests used during rehabilitation. There are no predictive models to identify patients at a higher risk of new psychiatric drug initiation. We investigated new psychiatric drug initiation in a mixed-indication cohort following craniectomy and developed a risk stratification model. Our retrospective single-centre study identified 145 patients who underwent a supratentorial craniectomy between 2020 and 2025. Predictor variables were selected based on clinical plausibility, including age, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), pupillary response, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) rank, indication for surgery, laterality, and comorbidities. The primary outcome was new psychiatric medication initiation in patients without a pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis. Logistic regression and LASSO penalised modelling were performed. The model was internally validated using bootstrap optimism correction and regression coefficient shrinkage. Across the whole cohort, 33.8% of patients were prescribed psychiatric medication. Of those without a pre-existing psychiatric diagnosis, 18.6% of patients were commenced on new psychiatric medication. Whilst no independent predictors were significant in multivariate analyses, LASSO regression retained higher GCS (coefficient + 0.0585), fewer comorbidities (coefficient - 0.1749), increasing age (coefficient + 0.0109), and a lower ASA (coefficient - 0.0838) as non-zero coefficients under penalisation. Our final model offered limited discrimination (apparent AUC 0.645; Brier score 0.144) with bootstrap internal validation revealing a mean optimism of 0.065 and an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.580 (optimism-corrected Brier score 0.156). We present the first internally validated risk prediction model for new psychiatric drug initiation in a mixed indication craniectomy cohort. Model discrimination was limited, indicating that baseline clinical variables are insufficient to identify patients at increased risk. Prospective studies incorporating gold-standard neuropsychiatric testing are needed before risk stratification could facilitate earlier neuropsychiatric referrals and support more holistic rehabilitation care.
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.