MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inclusion of Highest Glasgow Coma Scale Motor Component Score in Mortality Risk Adjustment for Benchmarking of Trauma Center Performance

2017· article· en· W2756377477 on OpenAlexaff
David Gómez, James P. Byrne, Aziz S. Alali, Wei Xiong, Chris Hoeft, Melanie Neal, Harris Subacius, Avery B. Nathens

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Surgeons · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlasgow Coma ScaleInjury Severity ScoreTrauma centerDecileBenchmarkingOdds ratioTraumatic brain injuryPoison controlInternal medicineInjury preventionRetrospective cohort studyEmergency medicineStatisticsSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief BACKGROUND: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is the most widely used measure of traumatic brain injury (TBI) severity. Currently, the arrival GCS motor component (mGCS) score is used in risk-adjustment models for external benchmarking of mortality. However, there is evidence that the highest mGCS score in the first 24 hours after injury might be a better predictor of death. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of including the highest mGCS score on the performance of risk-adjustment models and subsequent external benchmarking results. STUDY DESIGN: Data were derived from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program analytic dataset (January 2014 through March 2015) and were limited to the severe TBI cohort (16 years or older, isolated head injury, GCS ≤8). Risk-adjustment models were created that varied in the mGCS covariates only (initial score, highest score, or both initial and highest mGCS scores). Model performance and fit, as well as external benchmarking results, were compared. RESULTS: There were 6,553 patients with severe TBI across 231 trauma centers included. Initial and highest mGCS scores were different in 47% of patients (n = 3,097). Model performance and fit improved when both initial and highest mGCS scores were included, as evidenced by improved C-statistic, Akaike Information Criterion, and adjusted R-squared values. Three-quarters of centers changed their adjusted odds ratio decile, 2.6% of centers changed outlier status, and 45% of centers exhibited a ≥0.5-SD change in the odds ratio of death after including highest mGCS score in the model. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the concept that additional clinical information has the potential to not only improve the performance of current risk-adjustment models, but can also have a meaningful impact on external benchmarking strategies. Highest mGCS score is a good potential candidate for inclusion in additional models. Initial and highest motor component of Glasgow Coma Scale scores were different in half of patients with severe traumatic brain injury and were evident as different injury patterns and mortality. Including highest motor component of Glasgow Coma Scale score in risk-adjusted models improved model performance and fit, which translated into meaningful changes in external benchmarking results.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of SurgeonsSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207