Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 520

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

CATCH: a clinical decision rule for the use of computed tomography in children with minor head injury

Open access
Osmond, M. H., Klassen, T. P., Wells, G. A., Correll, R., Jarvis, A., Joubert, G., Bailey, B., Chauvin-Kimoff, L., Pusic, M., McConnell, D., Nijssen-Jordan, C., Silver, N., Taylor, B., Stiell, I. G., for the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) Head Injury Study Group·2010·Canadian Medical Association Journal

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is controversy about which children with minor head injury need to undergo computed tomography (CT). We aimed to develop a highly sensitive clinical decision rule for the use of CT in children with minor head injury. METHODS: For this multicentre cohort study, we enrolled consecutive children with blunt head trauma presenting with a score of 13-15 on the Glasgow Coma Scale and loss of consciousness, amnesia, disorientation, persistent vomiting or irritability. For each child, staff in the emergency department completed a standardized assessment form before any CT. The main outcomes were need for neurologic intervention and presence of brain injury as determined by CT. We developed a decision rule by using recursive partitioning to combine variables that were both reliable and strongly associated with the outcome measures and thus to find the best combinations of predictor variables that were highly sensitive for detecting the outcome measures with maximal specificity. RESULTS: Among the 3866 patients enrolled (mean age 9.2 years), 95 (2.5%) had a score of 13 on the Glasgow Coma Scale, 282 (7.3%) had a score of 14, and 3489 (90.2%) had a score of 15. CT revealed that 159 (4.1%) had a brain injury, and 24 (0.6%) underwent neurologic intervention. We derived a decision rule for CT of the head consisting of four high-risk factors (failure to reach score of 15 on the Glasgow coma scale within two hours, suspicion of open skull fracture, worsening headache and irritability) and three additional medium-risk factors (large, boggy hematoma of the scalp; signs of basal skull fracture; dangerous mechanism of injury). The high-risk factors were 100.0% sensitive (95% CI 86.2%-100.0%) for predicting the need for neurologic intervention and would require that 30.2% of patients undergo CT. The medium-risk factors resulted in 98.1% sensitivity (95% CI 94.6%-99.4%) for the prediction of brain injury by CT and would require that 52.0% of patients undergo CT. INTERPRETATION: The decision rule developed in this study identifies children at two levels of risk. Once the decision rule has been prospectively validated, it has the potential to standardize and improve the use of CT for children with minor head injury.

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 · 10.1503/cmaj.091421

Cites

4 of 4 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

Cited by

See all 520

Metadata

Authors
Osmond, M. H., Klassen, T. P., Wells, G. A., Correll, R., Jarvis, A., Joubert, G., Bailey, B., Chauvin-Kimoff, L., Pusic, M., McConnell, D., Nijssen-Jordan, C., Silver, N., Taylor, B., Stiell, I. G., & for the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) Head Injury Study Group
Venue
Canadian Medical Association Journal
Published
2010-02-08
Volume
182
Issue
4
Pages
341-348
ISSN
  • 0820-3946 (ISSN-L)
  • 1488-2329
OpenAlex
W2147488174
Cited by
520
References
4
FWCI
16.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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.