Recurrent Traumatic Brain Injury Surveillance Using Administrative Health Data: A Bayesian Latent Class Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The initial injury burden from incident TBI is significantly amplified by recurrent TBI (rTBI). Unfortunately, research assessing the accuracy to conduct rTBI surveillance is not available. Accurate surveillance information on recurrent injuries is needed to justify the allocation of resources to rTBI prevention and to conduct high quality epidemiological research on interventions that mitigate this injury burden. This study evaluates the accuracy of administrative health data (AHD) surveillance case definitions for rTBI and estimates the 1-year rTBI incidence adjusted for measurement error. Methods: A 25% random sample of AHD for Montreal residents from 2000 to 2014 was used in this study. Four widely used TBI surveillance case definitions, based on the International Classification of Disease and on radiological exams of the head, were applied to ascertain suspected rTBI cases. Bayesian latent class models were used to estimate the accuracy of each case definition and the 1-year rTBI measurement-error-adjusted incidence without relying on a gold standard rTBI definition that does not exist, across children (<18 years), adults (18-64 years), and elderly (> =65 years). Results: The adjusted 1-year rTBI incidence was 4.48 (95% CrI 3.42, 6.20) per 100 person-years across all age groups, as opposed to a crude estimate of 8.03 (95% CrI 7.86, 8.21) per 100 person-years. Patients with higher severity index TBI had a significantly higher incidence of rTBI compared to patients with lower severity index TBI. The case definition that identified patients undergoing a radiological examination of the head in the context of any traumatic injury was the most sensitive across children [0.46 (95% CrI 0.33, 0.61)], adults [0.79 (95% CrI 0.64, 0.94)], and elderly [0.87 (95% CrI 0.78, 0.95)]. The most specific case definition was the discharge abstract database in children [0.99 (95% CrI 0.99, 1.00)], and emergency room visits claims in adults/elderly [0.99 (95% CrI 0.99, 0.99)]. Median time to rTBI was the shortest in adults (75 days) and the longest in children (120 days). Conclusion: Conducting accurate surveillance and valid epidemiological research for rTBI using AHD is feasible when measurement error is accounted for.
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 | 0.043 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".