MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982632036 · doi:10.1007/s00134-019-05805-9

A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC)

2019· article· en· W2982632036 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory W. J. Hawryluk, Sergio Aguilera, András Büki, Eileen M. Bulger, Giuseppe Citerio, D. James Cooper, Ramon Diaz Arrastia, Michael N. Diringer, Anthony Figaji, Guoyi Gao, Romergryko G. Geocadin, Jamshid Ghajar, Odette A. Harris, Alan Hoffer, Peter J. Hutchinson, Mathew Joseph, Ryan S. Kitagawa, Geoffrey T. Manley, Stephan A. Mayer, David Menon, Geert Meyfroidt, Daniel B. Michael, Mauro Oddo, David O. Okonkwo, Mayur B. Patel, Claudia S. Robertson, Jeffrey V. Rosenfeld, Andrés M. Rubiano, Juan Sahuquillo, Franco Servadei, Lori Shutter, Deborah M. Stein, Nino Stocchetti, Fabio Silvio Taccone, Shelly D. Timmons, Eve C. Tsai, Jamie S. Ullman, Paul Vespa, Walter Videtta, David W. Wright, Christopher Zammit, Randall M. Chesnut

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersEuropean Society of Intensive Care MedicineNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchStrykerCongress of Neurological Surgeons
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionTraumatic brain injuryIntracranial pressureIntracranial pressure monitoringSedationIntensive care medicineAlgorithmMedical emergencySurgeryPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Management algorithms for adult severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) were omitted in later editions of the Brain Trauma Foundation's sTBI Management Guidelines, as they were not evidence-based. METHODS: We used a Delphi-method-based consensus approach to address management of sTBI patients undergoing intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Forty-two experienced, clinically active sTBI specialists from six continents comprised the panel. Eight surveys iterated queries and comments. An in-person meeting included whole- and small-group discussions and blinded voting. Consensus required 80% agreement. We developed heatmaps based on a traffic-light model where panelists' decision tendencies were the focus of recommendations. RESULTS: We provide comprehensive algorithms for ICP-monitor-based adult sTBI management. Consensus established 18 interventions as fundamental and ten treatments not to be used. We provide a three-tier algorithm for treating elevated ICP. Treatments within a tier are considered empirically equivalent. Higher tiers involve higher risk therapies. Tiers 1, 2, and 3 include 10, 4, and 3 interventions, respectively. We include inter-tier considerations, and recommendations for critical neuroworsening to assist the recognition and treatment of declining patients. Novel elements include guidance for autoregulation-based ICP treatment based on MAP Challenge results, and two heatmaps to guide (1) ICP-monitor removal and (2) consideration of sedation holidays for neurological examination. CONCLUSIONS: Our modern and comprehensive sTBI-management protocol is designed to assist clinicians managing sTBI patients monitored with ICP-monitors alone. Consensus-based (class III evidence), it provides management recommendations based on combined expert opinion. It reflects neither a standard-of-care nor a substitute for thoughtful individualized management.

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)0.089
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0890.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations627
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care MedicineSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207