Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 415

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prognostic Value of Secondary Insults in Traumatic Brain Injury: Results from The IMPACT Study

McHugh, Gillian S., Engel, Doortje C., Butcher, Isabella, Steyerberg, Ewout W., Lu, Juan, Mushkudiani, Nino, Hernández, Adrián V., Marmarou, Anthony, Maas, Andrew I.R., Murray, Gordon D.·2007·Journal of Neurotrauma

Abstract

We determined the relationship between secondary insults (hypoxia, hypotension, and hypothermia) occurring prior to or on admission to hospital and 6-month outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI). A meta-analysis of individual patient data, from seven Phase III randomized clinical trials (RCT) in moderate or severe TBI and three TBI population-based series, was performed to model outcome as measured by the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). Proportional odds modeling was used to relate the probability of a poor outcome to hypoxia (N = 5661), hypotension ( N = 6629), and hypothermia ( N = 4195) separately. We additionally analyzed the combined effects of hypoxia and hypotension and performed exploratory analysis of associations with computerized tomography (CT) classification and month of injury. Having a pre-enrollment insult of hypoxia, hypotension or hypothermia is strongly associated with a poorer outcome (odds ratios of 2.1 95% CI [1.7-2.6], 2.7 95% CI [2.1-3.4], and 2.2 95% CI [1.6-3.2], respectively). Patients with both hypoxia and hypotension had poorer outcomes than those with either insult alone. Radiological signs of raised intracranial pressure (CT class III or IV) were more frequent in patients who had sustained hypoxia or hypotension. A significant association was observed between month of injury and hypothermia. The occurrence of secondary insults prior to or on admission to hospital in TBI patients is strongly related to poorer outcome and should therefore be a priority for emergency department personnel.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/neu.2006.0031

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 415

Metadata

Authors
McHugh, G. S., Engel, D. C., Butcher, I., Steyerberg, E. W., Lu, J., Mushkudiani, N., Hernández, A. V., Marmarou, A., Maas, A. I. R., & Murray, G. D.
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Published
2007-02
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
287-293
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
OpenAlex
W2082851412
Cited by
415
References
2
FWCI
10.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prognostic Value of Secondary Insults in Traumatic Brain Injury: Results from The IMPACT Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/neu.2006.0031
The paper
McHugh, G. S., Engel, D. C., Butcher, I., Steyerberg, E. W., Lu, J., Mushkudiani, N., Hernández, A. V., Marmarou, A., Maas, A. I. R., & Murray, G. D. (2007). Prognostic Value of Secondary Insults in Traumatic Brain Injury: Results from The IMPACT Study. Journal of Neurotrauma. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2006.0031

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.