What Is the Incidence of Intracranial Bleeding in Patients with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury? A Retrospective Study in 3088 Canadian CT Head Rule Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Only limited data exists in terms of the incidence of intracranial bleeding (ICB) in patients with mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI). METHODS: We retrospectively identified 3088 patients (mean age 41 range (7-99) years) presenting with isolated MTBI and GCS 14-15 at our Emergency Department who had undergone cranial CT (CCT) between 2002 and 2011. Indication for CCT was according to the "Canadian CT head rules." Patients with ICB were either submitted for neurosurgical treatment or kept under surveillance for at least 24 hours. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to correlate the incidence of ICB with age, gender, or intake of coumarins, platelet aggregation inhibitors, or heparins. RESULTS: 149 patients (4.8%) had ICB on CCT. No patient with ICB died or deteriorated neurologically. The incidence of ICB increased with age and intake of anticoagulants without clinically relevant correlation (R = 0.11; P < 0.001; R = -0.06; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data show an incidence of 4.8% for ICB after MTBI. However, neurological deterioration after MTBI seems to be rare, and the need for neurosurgical intervention is only required in selected cases. The general need for CCT in patients after MTBI is therefore questionable, and clinical surveillance may be sufficient when CCT is not available.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".