MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290802644 · doi:10.1089/neur.2022.0042

Pre-Injury Antiplatelet Therapy and Risk of Adverse Outcomes after Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2022· review· en· W4290802644 on OpenAlexaff
François Mathieu, Armaan K. Malhotra, Jerry C. Ku, Frederick A. Zeiler, Jefferson R. Wilson, Farhad Pirouzmand, Damon C. Scales

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurotrauma Reports · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSt. Michael's HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryMeta-analysisInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialOdds ratioObservational studyConfidence intervalSystematic reviewPopulationAdverse effectIntracerebral hemorrhageMEDLINEPhysical therapySubarachnoid hemorrhagePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing number of trauma patients presenting on pre-injury antiplatelet (AP) agents attributable to an aging population and expanding cardio- or cerebrovascular indications for antithrombotic therapy. The effects of different AP regimens on outcomes after traumatic brain injury (TBI) have yet to be elucidated, despite the implications on patient/family counseling and the potential need for better reversal strategies. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of different pre-injury AP regimens on outcomes after TBI. In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the OVID Medline, Embase, BIOSIS, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to February 2022 using a combination of terms pertaining to TBI and use of AP agents. Baseline demographics and study characteristics as well as outcome data pertaining to intracerebral hematoma (ICH) progression, need for neurosurgical intervention, hospital length of stay, mortality, and functional outcome were extracted. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences comparing groups were calculated using random-effects models. Thirteen observational studies, totaling 1244 patients receiving single AP therapy with acetylsalicylic acid or clopidogrel, 413 patients on dual AP therapy, and 3027 non-AP users were included. No randomized controlled trials were identified. There were significant associations between dual AP use and ICH progression (OR, 2.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19–6.61; I 2 , 85%; p = 0.02) and need for neurosurgical intervention post-TBI (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.15–2.28; I 2 , 15%; p = 0.006) compared to non-users, but not between single AP therapy and non-users. There were no associations between AP use and hospital length of stay or mortality after trauma. Pre-injury dual AP use, but not single AP use, is associated with higher rates of ICH progression and neurosurgical intervention post-TBI. However, the overall quality of studies was low, and this association should be further investigated in larger studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurotrauma ReportsSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207