MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991659290 · doi:10.1089/neu.2013.2925

Neurological Outcome Scale for Traumatic Brain Injury: III. Criterion-Related Validity and Sensitivity to Change in the NABIS Hypothermia-II Clinical Trial

2013· article· en· W1991659290 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen R. McCauley, Elisabeth A. Wilde, Paolo Moretti, Marianne MacLeod, Claudia Pedroza, Pamala Drever, Sierra Fourwinds, Melisa L. Frisby, Sue R. Beers, James N. Scott, Jill V. Hunter, Elfrides Traipe, Alex B. Valadka, David O. Okonkwo, David A. Zygun, Ava M. Puccio, Guy L. Clifton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryHypothermiaGlasgow Outcome ScalePsychologyClinical trialMedicineAnesthesiaClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The neurological outcome scale for traumatic brain injury (NOS-TBI) is a measure assessing neurological functioning in patients with TBI. We hypothesized that the NOS-TBI would exhibit adequate concurrent and predictive validity and demonstrate more sensitivity to change, compared with other well-established outcome measures. We analyzed data from the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia-II clinical trial. Participants were 16-45 years of age with severe TBI assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. For analysis of criterion-related validity (concurrent and predictive), Spearman's rank-order correlations were calculated between the NOS-TBI and the glasgow outcome scale (GOS), GOS-extended (GOS-E), disability rating scale (DRS), and neurobehavioral rating scale-revised (NRS-R). Concurrent validity was demonstrated through significant correlations between the NOS-TBI and GOS, GOS-E, DRS, and NRS-R measured contemporaneously at 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury (all p<0.0013). For prediction analyses, the multiplicity-adjusted p value using the false discovery rate was <0.015. The 1-month NOS-TBI score was a significant predictor of outcome in the GOS, GOS-E, and DRS at 3 and 6 months postinjury (all p<0.015). The 3-month NOS-TBI significantly predicted GOS, GOS-E, DRS, and NRS-R outcomes at 6 and 12 months postinjury (all p<0.0015). Sensitivity to change was analyzed using Wilcoxon's signed rank-sum test of subsamples demonstrating no change in the GOS or GOS-E between 3 and 6 months. The NOS-TBI demonstrated higher sensitivity to change, compared with the GOS (p<0.038) and GOS-E (p<0.016). In summary, the NOS-TBI demonstrated adequate concurrent and predictive validity as well as sensitivity to change, compared with gold-standard outcome measures. The NOS-TBI may enhance prediction of outcome in clinical practice and measurement of outcome in TBI research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.280
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.147 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207