MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925263181 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000003728

Prognostic Value of Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein in Patients With Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019· review· en· W2925263181 on OpenAlexaff
Michèle Shemilt, Amélie Boutin, François Lauzier, Ryan Zarychanski, Lynne Moore, Lauralyn McIntyre, Linda Nadeau, Dean Fergusson, Éric Mercier, Patrick Archambault, François Lamontagne, Caroline Perron, Caroline Léger, Alexis F. Turgeon

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicS100 Proteins and Annexins
Canadian institutionsQ & T ResearchCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de SherbrookeCentre Intégré de Santé et Services Sociaux de Chaudière-AppalacheOttawa HospitalUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of OttawaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlial fibrillary acidic proteinMedicineTraumatic brain injuryGlasgow Outcome ScaleInternal medicineGlasgow Coma ScalePoison controlCohortAbbreviated Injury ScaleCohort studyInjury preventionInjury Severity ScoreSurgeryEmergency medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Biomarkers have been suggested as potential prognostic predictors following a moderate or severe traumatic brain injury but their prognostic accuracy is still uncertain. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the ability of the glial fibrillary acidic protein to predict prognosis in patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and BIOSIS electronic databases and conference abstracts, bibliographies of selected studies, and narrative reviews were searched. STUDY SELECTION: Pairs of reviewers identified eligible studies. Cohort studies including greater than or equal to four patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury and reporting glial fibrillary acidic protein levels according to the outcomes of interest, namely Glasgow Outcome Scale or Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale, and mortality, were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data from the selected studies using a standardized case report form. Mean levels were log-transformed, and their differences were pooled with random effect models. Results are presented as geometric mean ratios. Methodologic quality, risk of bias, and applicability concerns of the included studies were assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven-thousand seven-hundred sixty-five citations were retrieved of which 15 studies were included in the systematic review (n = 1,070), and nine were included in the meta-analysis (n = 701). We found significant associations between glial fibrillary acidic protein serum levels and Glasgow Outcome Scale score less than or equal to 3 or Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale score less than or equal to 4 (six studies: geometric mean ratio 4.98 [95% CI, 2.19-11.13]; I = 94%) and between mortality (seven studies: geometric mean ratio 8.13 [95% CI, 3.89-17.00]; I = 99%). CONCLUSIONS: Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein levels were significantly higher in patients with an unfavorable prognosis. Glial fibrillary acidic protein has a potential for clinical bedside use in helping for prognostic assessment. Further research should focus on multimodal approaches including tissue biomarkers for prognostic evaluation in critically ill patients with traumatic brain 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.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.032
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicS100 Proteins and AnnexinsFrench-language works237,207