MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2272466120 · doi:10.1097/ta.0000000000000922

Timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in severe traumatic brain injury

2015· article· en· W2272466120 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria McCredie, Aziz S. Alali, Wei Xiong, Gordon D. Rubenfeld, Brian H. Cuthbertson, Damon C. Scales, Avery B. Nathens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersAmerican College of Surgeons
KeywordsMedicineGlasgow Coma ScaleTrauma centerOdds ratioTraumatic brain injuryInjury Severity ScoreConfidence intervalRetrospective cohort studyCohortPoison controlEmergency medicineInjury preventionPediatricsInternal medicineSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is complex and confounded by uncertainty in prognoses. Studies have demonstrated significant unexplained variation in mortality between centers. Possible explanations include differences in the quality and intensity of care across centers, including the appropriateness and timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. We postulated that centers with a preponderance of early deaths might have a more pessimistic approach to the TBI patient, which would be reflected in an increased hospital TBI-related mortality. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study. Time to death was used as a proxy for time to withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies. Centers were classified as early or late based on when the majority (75th percentile) of their TBI-related deaths occurred. We evaluated the association between adjusted mortality and center classification using a hierarchical multivariable model. Two hundred trauma centers contributing data to the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program from 2010 through 2013 were involved. The cohort included 17,505 patients with severe isolated TBI. RESULTS: One hundred eight centers were classified as early centers. The 75th percentile for time to death was 4 days among early centers versus 7 days in late centers. Mortality was 34% and 33%, respectively. After adjustment for case mix, care in an early center was not associated with increased odds of death (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.09). Higher odds of death were independently associated with age, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, head Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score, multiple comorbidities, traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, intracerebral mass lesions, brainstem lesions, and signs of compressed or absent basal cisterns. CONCLUSION: Centers rendering early decisions related to withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies in TBI patients, as measured by time until death, do not have worse outcomes than those making later decisions. How and when these decisions are made requires further exploration to balance an opportunity for clinical improvement with appropriate resource use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207