MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382203661 · doi:10.1089/neu.2023.0029

Prognostic Value of Serum Biomarkers in Patients With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Differentiated by Marshall Computer Tomography Classification

2023· article· en· W4382203661 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie Richter, Endre Czeiter, Krisztina Amrein, Ana Mikolić, Jan Verheyden, Kevin Wang, Andrew I.R. Maas, Ewout W. Steyerberg, András Büki, David Menon, Virginia Newcombe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean CommissionAcademy of Medical SciencesNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsGlasgow Coma ScaleTraumatic brain injuryMedicineGlasgow Outcome ScaleBiomarkerInternal medicineOncologySurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prognostication is challenging in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in whom computed tomography (CT) fails to fully explain a low level of consciousness. Serum biomarkers reflect the extent of structural damage in a different way than CT does, but it is unclear whether biomarkers provide additional prognostic value across the range of CT abnormalities. This study aimed to determine the added predictive value of biomarkers, differentiated by imaging severity. This prognostic study used data from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study (2014–2017). The analysis included patients aged ≥16 years with a moderate-severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] <13) who had an acute CT and serum biomarkers obtained ≤24h of injury. Of six protein biomarkers (GFAP, NFL, NSE, S100B, Tau, UCH-L1), the most prognostic panel was selected using lasso regression. The performance of established prognostic models (CRASH and IMPACT) was assessed before and after the addition of the biomarker panel and compared between patients with different CT Marshall scores (Marshall score <3 vs. Marshall score ≥3). Outcome was assessed at six months post-injury using the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE), and dichotomized into favorable and unfavorable (GOSE <5). We included 872 patients with moderate-severe TBI. The mean age was 47 years (range 16–95); 647 (74%) were male and 438 (50%) had a Marshall CT score <3. The serum biomarkers GFAP, NFL, S100B and UCH-L1 provided complementary prognostic information; NSE and Tau showed no added value. The addition of the biomarker panel to established prognostic models increased the area under the curve (AUC) by 0.08 and 0.03, and the explained variation in outcome by 13–14% and 7–8%, for patients with a Marshall score of <3 and ≥3, respectively. The incremental AUC of biomarkers for individual models was significantly greater when the Marshall score was <3 compared with ≥3 ( p < 0.001). Serum biomarkers improve outcome prediction after moderate-severe TBI across the range of imaging severities and especially in patients with a Marshall score <3.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207