MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381164118 · doi:10.1097/htr.0000000000000881

Risk of Adverse Outcomes Among Veterans Who Screen Positive for Traumatic Brain Injury in the Veterans Health Administration But Do Not Complete a Comprehensive Evaluation: A LIMBIC-CENC Study

2023· article· en· W4381164118 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Terri K. Pogoda, Rachel Sayko Adams, Kathleen F. Carlson, Clara E. Dismuke‐Greer, Megan E. Amuan, Mary Jo Pugh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWalter Reed National Military Medical CenterReseau canadien de recherche respiratoireHealth Services Research and DevelopmentU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryPoisson regressionPoison controlInjury preventionRetrospective cohort studyNational Death IndexEmergency medicinePsychiatryPopulationInternal medicineHazard ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether post-9/11 veterans who screened positive for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) but did not complete a Comprehensive TBI Evaluation (CTBIE) were at higher risk of subsequent adverse events compared with veterans who screened positive and completed a CTBIE. Upon CTBIE completion, information assessed by a trained TBI clinician indicates whether there is mTBI history (mTBI+) or not (mTBI-). SETTING: Veterans Health Administration (VHA) outpatient services. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 52 700 post-9/11 veterans who screened positive for TBI were included. The follow-up review period was between fiscal years 2008 and 2019. The 3 groups studied based on CTBIE completion and mTBI status were: (1) mTBI+ (48.6%), (2) mTBI- (17.8%), and (3) no CTBIE (33.7%). DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. Log binomial and Poisson regression models adjusting for demographic, military, pre-TBI screening health, and VHA covariates examined risk ratios of incident outcomes based on CTBIE completion and mTBI status. MAIN MEASURES: Incident substance use disorders (SUDs), alcohol use disorder (AUD), opioid use disorder (OUD), overdose, and homelessness documented in VHA administrative records, and mortality as documented in the National Death Index, 3 years post-TBI screen. VHA outpatient utilization was also examined. RESULTS: Compared with the no CTBIE group, the mTBI+ group had 1.28 to 1.31 times the risk of incident SUD, AUD, and overdose, but 0.73 times the risk of death 3 years following TBI screening. The mTBI- group had 0.70 times the risk of OUD compared with the no CTBIE group within the same period. The no CTBIE group also had the lowest VHA utilization. CONCLUSIONS: There were mixed findings on risk of adverse events for the no CTBIE group relative to the mTBI+ and mTBI- groups. Future research is needed to explore the observed differences, including health conditions and healthcare utilization, documented outside VHA among veterans who screen positive for TBI.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.456
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Head Trauma RehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207