The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Epidemiology, Severity Classification, and Outcome of Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Prospective Multicenter Study
Open accessAbstract
Changes in the demographics, approach, and treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients require regular evaluation of epidemiological profiles, injury severity classification, and outcomes. This prospective multicenter study provides detailed information on TBI-related variables of 508 moderate-to-severe TBI patients. Variability in epidemiology and outcome is examined by comparing our cohort with previous multicenter studies. Additionally, the relation between outcome and injury severity classification assessed at different time points is studied. Based on the emergency department Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), 339 patients were classified as having severe and 129 as having moderate TBI. In 15%, the diagnosis differed when the accident scene GCS was used for classification. In-hospital mortality was higher if severe TBI was diagnosed at both time points (44%) compared to moderate TBI at one or both time points (7-15%, p<0.001). Furthermore, 14% changed diagnosis when a threshold (≥6 h) for impaired consciousness was used as a criterion for severe TBI: In-hospital mortality was<5% when impaired consciousness lasted for<6 h. This suggests that combining multiple clinical assessments and using a threshold for impaired consciousness may improve the classification of injury severity and prediction of outcome. Compared to earlier multicenter studies, our cohort demonstrates a different case mix that includes a higher age (mean=47.3 years), more diffuse (Traumatic Coma Databank [TCDB] I-II) injuries (58%), and more major extracranial injuries (40%), with relatively high 6 month mortality rates for both severe (46%) and moderate (21%) TBI. Our results confirm that TBI epidemiology and injury patterns have changed in recent years whereas case fatality rates remain high.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
WILSON, J. T. L., PETTIGREW, L. E. L., & TEASDALE, G. M. (1998) · Journal of Neurotrauma · doi:10.1089/neu.1998.15.573 · Cited by 2,386
Patient age and outcome following severe traumatic brain injury: an analysis of 5600 patients
Hukkelhoven, C. W. P. M., Steyerberg, E. W., Rampen, A. J. J., Farace, E., Habbema, J. D. F., Marshall, L. F., Murray, G. D., & Maas, A. I. R. (2003) · Journal of Neurosurgery · doi:10.3171/jns.2003.99.4.0666 · Cited by 641
Self-citation(2004) · doi:10.1097/01.ta.0000115650.07193.66 · Cited by 382
Cited by
Mwale, P. F., Hsieh, C.-T., Yen, T.-L., Jan, J.-S., Taliyan, R., Yang, C.-H., & Yang, W.-B. (2025) · Molecular Neurodegeneration · doi:10.1186/s13024-025-00801-8 · Cited by 47
Pituitary function within the first year after traumatic brain injury or subarachnoid haemorrhage
Tölli, A., Borg, J., Bellander, B.-M., Johansson, F., & Höybye, C. (2017) · Journal of Endocrinological Investigation · doi:10.1007/s40618-016-0546-1 · Cited by 30
(2016) · Research Online (University of Wollongong) · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Andriessen, T. M. J. C., Horn, J., Franschman, G., van der Naalt, J., Haitsma, I., Jacobs, B., Steyerberg, E. W., & Vos, P. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurotrauma
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-10
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2019-2031
- ISSN
- 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9042
- OpenAlex
- W2100017480
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.