MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381469199 · doi:10.1089/neu.2023.0149

Pediatric Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations

2023· review· en· W4381469199 on OpenAlexafffund
Anis Ben Abdeljelil, Gabrielle Freire, Natalie Yanchar, Alexis F. Turgeon, Suzanne Beno, Mélanie Berube, Antonia Stang, Thomas Stelfox, Roger Zemek, Émilie Beaulieu, Isabelle Gagnon, Belinda J. Gabbe, François Lauzier, Mélanie Labrosse, Pier‐Alexandre Tardif, Theony Deshommes, Janyce Gnanvi, Lynne Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of TorontoMontreal Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of CalgarySickKids FoundationUniversité de MontréalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversité LavalHôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryGuidelineMEDLINESystematic reviewQuality of evidenceEvidence-based medicineEvidence-based practiceIntensive care medicineMeta-analysisInternal medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death and disability in children. Many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have addressed pediatric TBI in the last decade but significant variability in the use of these guidelines persists. Here, we systematically review CPGs recommendations for pediatric moderate-to-severe TBI, evaluate the quality of CPGs, synthesize the quality of evidence and strength of included recommendations, and identify knowledge gaps. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE ® , Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Web sites of organizations publishing recommendations on pediatric injury care. We included CPGs developed in high-income countries from January 2012 to May 2023, with at least one recommendation targeting pediatric (≤ 19 years old) moderate-to-severe TBI populations. The quality of included clinical practice guidelines was assessed using the AGREE II tool. We synthesized evidence on recommendations using a matrix based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We identified 15 CPGs of which 9 were rated moderate to high quality using AGREE II. We identified 90 recommendations, of which 40 (45%) were evidence based. Eleven of these were based on moderate to high quality evidence and were graded as moderate or strong by at least one guideline. These included transfer, imaging, intracranial pressure control, and discharge advice. We identified gaps in evidence-based recommendations for red blood cell transfusion, plasma and platelet transfusion, thromboprophylaxis, surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis, early diagnosis of hypopituitarism, and mental health mangement. Many up-to-date CPGs are available, but there is a paucity of evidence to support recommendations, highlighting the urgent need for robust clinical research in this vulnerable population. Our results may be used by clinicians to identify recommendations based on the highest level of evidence, by healthcare administrators to inform guideline implementation in clinical settings, by researchers to identify areas where robust evidence is needed, and by guideline writing groups to inform the updating of existing guidelines or the development of new ones.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.143
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.143
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.008
Bibliometrics0.0170.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.606
GPT teacher head0.628
Teacher spread0.023 · 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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207