MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Derivation and Validation of a Serum Biomarker Panel to Identify Infants With Acute Intracranial Hemorrhage

2017· article· en· W2606858990 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel P. Berger, Brian J. Pak, Mariya D. Kolesnikova, Janet Fromkin, Richard A. Saladino, Bruce E. Herman, Mary Clyde Pierce, David Englert, P. Smith, Patrick M. Kochanek

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Pediatrics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Abuse and Related Trauma
Canadian institutionsAxela (Canada)
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsMedicineBiomarkerEmergency medicineHead traumaEmergency departmentPediatricsLogistic regressionHead injuryInternal medicineSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Abusive head trauma is the leading cause of death from physical abuse. Missing the diagnosis of abusive head trauma, particularly in its mild form, is common and contributes to increased morbidity and mortality. Serum biomarkers may have potential as quantitative point-of-care screening tools to alert physicians to the possibility of intracranial hemorrhage. Objective: To identify and validate a set of biomarkers that could be the basis of a multivariable model to identify intracranial hemorrhage in well-appearing infants using the Ziplex System. Design, Setting, and Participants: Binary logistic regression was used to develop a multivariable model incorporating 3 serum biomarkers (matrix metallopeptidase-9, neuron-specific enolase, and vascular cellular adhesion molecule-1) and 1 clinical variable (total hemoglobin). The model was then prospectively validated. Multiplex biomarker measurements were performed using Flow-Thru microarray technology on the Ziplex System, which has potential as a point-of-care system. The model was tested at 3 pediatric emergency departments in level I pediatric trauma centers (Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Primary Children's Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah; and Lurie Children's Hospital, Chicago, Illinois) among well-appearing infants who presented for care owing to symptoms that placed them at increased risk of abusive head trauma. The study took place from November 2006 to April 2014 at Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, June 2010 to August 2013 at Primary Children's Hospital, and January 2011 to August 2013 at Lurie Children's Hospital. Main Outcomes and Measures: A mathematical model that can predict acute intracranial hemorrhage in infants at increased risk of abusive head trauma. Results: The multivariable model, Biomarkers for Infant Brain Injury Score, was applied prospectively to 599 patients. The mean (SD) age was 4.7 (3.1) months. Fifty-two percent were boys, 78% were white, and 8% were Hispanic. At a cutoff of 0.182, the model was 89.3% sensitive (95% CI, 87.7-90.4) and 48.0% specific (95% CI, 47.3-48.9) for acute intracranial hemorrhage. Positive and negative predictive values were 21.3% and 95.6%, respectively. The model was neither sensitive nor specific for atraumatic brain abnormalities, isolated skull fractures, or chronic intracranial hemorrhage. Conclusion and Relevance: The Biomarkers for Infant Brain Injury Score, a multivariable model using 3 serum biomarker concentrations and serum hemoglobin, can identify infants with acute intracranial hemorrhage. Accurate and timely identification of intracranial hemorrhage in infants without a history of trauma in whom trauma may not be part of the differential diagnosis has the potential to decrease morbidity and mortality from abusive head trauma.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA PediatricsSame topicChild Abuse and Related TraumaFrench-language works237,207