Cited by 183Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesTrauma and Emergency Care Studies

Progress in Developing Common Data Elements for Traumatic Brain Injury Research: Version Two – The End of the Beginning

Open access
Hicks, Ramona, Giacino, Joseph, Harrison-Felix, Cynthia, Manley, Geoffrey, Valadka, Alex, Wilde, Elisabeth A.·2013·Journal of Neurotrauma

Abstract

To accelerate data sharing and research on traumatic brain injury (TBI), several federal agencies have been collaborating to support the development and implementation of common data elements (CDEs). The first recommendations for CDEs were made in 2010, and were well suited for hospital-based studies of acute TBI in adults. To broaden the utility of the TBI CDEs, experts were asked to update the recommendations to make them relevant to all ages, levels of injury severity, and phases of recovery. The second version of the TBI CDEs (v.2) was organized around four major study types: 1) epidemiological research; 2) studies on acute, hospitalized patients; 3) studies of the rehabilitation for moderate/severe TBI; and 4) mild TBI/concussion research. Given the heterogeneity of TBI, only a small set of core CDEs were found to be relevant across all study types. However, within groups, a much larger set of highly relevant CDEs were identified, and these were called basic CDEs. In addition, an expanded number of supplemental CDEs were specified and recommended for use depending upon the study goals. Version 2 provides a rich data dictionary for TBI research with about 900 CDEs. Many of the CDEs overlap across the study types, which will facilitate comparisons and meta-analysis across studies. Further modifications of the CDEs should be based on evaluation of their usefulness following implementation across a range of studies.

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.2013.2938

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The use of measures recommended as NIH NINDS TBI common data elements allows other studies to compare their results to ours.

    “Finally, the use of measures recommended as NIH NINDS TBI common data elements allows other studies to compare their results to ours (Hicks et al., 2013; Report Viewer | NINDS Common Data Elements, n.d.)”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 24 · Cited by 183

Authors
Hicks, R., Giacino, J., Harrison-Felix, C., Manley, G., Valadka, A., & Wilde, E. A.
Affiliations
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Craig Hospital (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Seton Brain and Spine Institute, Austin, Texas.
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Hicks, Ramona
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Published
2013-11-15
Volume
30
Issue
22
Pages
1852-1861
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
OpenAlex
W2171556983
Cited by
183
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1
FWCI
7.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurotrauma (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, common data elements, data sharing, data standardization, mild traumatic brain injury, concussion, moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, rehabilitation, data dictionary, cross-study comparability
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Brain Concussion, Brain Injuries, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Research Design, United States, Trauma Severity Indices, Research Report

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