The clinical significance of isolated traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage in mild traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rates of clinical and radiographic progression and the need for neurosurgical intervention in patients with isolated traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (itSAH) after mild traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score, 13-15) has not been well established.The aim of this work was to review the evidence regarding patient outcomes after mild traumatic brain injury with itSAH. METHODS: Two authors independently extracted the data according to a predefined protocol. The proportions of patients who had the outcomes of interest were pooled using random-effects model. The quality of included studies was assessed using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies scale. RESULTS: Thirteen studies reporting on 15,327 patients met inclusion criteria, and outcomes were pooled where available. No patient required neurosurgical intervention on presentation to hospital, and the incidence of need for eventual neurosurgical intervention was 0.0017% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-0.39%). Moreover, the pooled analyses for all patients with available data showed an incidence of 5.76% (95% CI, 1.18-12.94%) for radiographic progression, 0.75% (95% CI, 0-2.39%) for neurologic deterioration, and 0.60% (95% CI, 0.09-1.41%) for mortality. Only one patient had died due to neurological injury. CONCLUSIONS: These patients experience very low rates of radiographic progression and neurologic deterioration and rarely require neurosurgical intervention or die due to neurological injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Meta-analysis, 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.110 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".