MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087044966 · doi:10.1136/bmj.f1757

Predictive value of S-100  protein for prognosis in patients with moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: systematic review and meta-analysis

2013· review· en· W2087044966 on OpenAlex
Éric Mercier, Amélie Boutin, François Lauzier, Dean Fergusson, Jean-François Simard, Ryan Zarychanski, Lynne Moore, Lauralyn A. McIntyre, Patrick Archambault, François Lamontagne, France Légaré, Ed Randell, Line Nadeau, François Rousseau, AF Turgeon

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicS100 Proteins and Annexins
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusUniversity of OttawaUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité LavalCanadian Anesthesia Research Foundation
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryMeta-analysisPredictive valueMedicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the ability and accuracy of the S-100β protein in predicting prognosis after a moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, BIOSIS (from their inception to April 2012), conference abstracts, bibliographies of eligible articles, and relevant narrative reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently reviewed citations and selected eligible studies, defined as cohort studies or randomised control trials including patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury and evaluating the prognostic value of S-100β protein. Outcomes evaluated were mortality, score on the Glasgow outcome scale, or brain death. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted data using a standardised form and evaluated the methodological quality of included studies. Pooled results were presented with geometric means ratios and analysed with random effect models. Prespecified sensitivity analyses were performed to explain heterogeneity. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 9228 citations. Two randomised controlled trials and 39 cohort studies were considered eligible (1862 patients). Most studies (n=23) considered Glasgow outcome score ≤ 3 as an unfavourable outcome. All studies reported at least one measurement of S-100β within 24 hours after traumatic brain injury. There was a significant positive association between S-100β protein concentrations and mortality (12 studies: geometric mean ratio 2.55, 95% confidence interval 2.02 to 3.21, I(2)=56%) and score ≤ 3 (18 studies: 2.62, 2.01 to 3.42, I(2)=79%). Sensitivity analysis based on sampling time, sampling type, blinding of outcome assessors, and timing of outcome assessment yielded similar results. Thresholds for serum S-100β protein values with 100% specificity ranged from 1.38 to 10.50 µg/L for mortality (six studies) and from 2.16 to 14.00 µg/L for unfavourable neurological prognosis as defined by the Glasgow outcome score. CONCLUSIONS: After moderate or severe traumatic brain injury, serum S-100β protein concentrations are significantly associated with unfavourable prognosis in the short, mid, or long term. Optimal thresholds for discrimination remain unclear. Measuring the S-100β protein could be useful in evaluating the severity of traumatic brain injury and in the determination of long term prognosis in patients with moderate and severe injury.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Quick stats

Citations131
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicS100 Proteins and AnnexinsFrench-language works237,207