MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307156986 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.1021877

The prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review

2022· review· en· W4307156986 on OpenAlexaff
Sherief Ghozy, Amr Ehab El‐Qushayri, Joseph Varney, Salah Eddine Oussama Kacimi, Eshak I. Bahbah, Mostafa Ebraheem Morra, Jaffer Shah, Kevin M. Kallmes, Alzhraa Salah Abbas, Mohamed Elfil, Badrah S. Alghamdi, Ghulam Md Ashraf, Rowa Y. Alhabbab, Adam A. Dmytriw

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersKing Abdulaziz University
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryInternal medicineNeutrophil to lymphocyte ratioBiomarkerUnivariateMultivariate analysisIntensive care medicineMultivariate statisticsLymphocytePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) places a heavy load on healthcare systems worldwide. Despite significant advancements in care, the TBI-related mortality is 30–50% and in most cases involves adolescents or young adults. Previous literature has suggested that neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) may serve as a sensitive biomarker in predicting clinical outcomes following TBI. With conclusive evidence in this regard lacking, this study aimed to systematically review all original studies reporting the effectiveness of NLR as a predictor of TBI outcomes. A systematic search of eight databases was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) recommendations. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool. Eight studies were ultimately included in the study. In most of the studies interrogated, severity outcomes were successfully predicted by NLR in both univariate and multivariate prediction models, in different follow-up durations up to 6 months. A high NLR at 24 and 48 h after TBI in pediatric patients was associated with worse clinical outcomes. On pooling the NLR values within studies assessing its association with the outcome severity (favorable or not), patients with favorable outcomes had 37% lower NLR values than those with unfavorable ones (RoM= 0.63; 95% CI = 0.44–0.88; p = 0.007). However, there were considerable heterogeneity in effect estimates (I2 = 99%; p < 0.001). Moreover, NLR was a useful indicator of mortality at both 6-month and 1-year intervals. In conjunction with clinical and radiographic parameters, NLR might be a useful, inexpensive marker in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with TBI. However, the considerable heterogeneity in current literature keeps it under investigation with further studies are warranted to confirm the reliability of NLR in predicting TBI outcomes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.011
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207