| 1. |
- Gravesteijn, Benjamin Yaël, et al.
(författare)
-
Missing Data in Prediction Research : A Five-Step Approach for Multiple Imputation, Illustrated in the CENTER-TBI Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurotrauma. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 0897-7151 .- 1557-9042. ; 38:13, s. 1842-1857
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In medical research, missing data is common. In acute diseases, such as traumatic brain injury (TBI), even well-conducted prospective studies may suffer from missing data in baseline characteristics and outcomes. Statistical models may simply drop patients with any missing values, potentially leaving a selected subset of the original cohort. Imputation is widely accepted by methodologists as an appropriate way to deal with missing data. We aim to provide practical guidance on handling missing data for prediction modeling. We hereto propose a five-step approach, centered around single and multiple imputation: 1) explore the missing data patterns; 2) choose a method of imputation; 3) perform imputation; 4) assess diagnostics of the imputation; and 5) analyze the imputed data sets. We illustrate these five steps with the estimation and validation of the IMPACT (International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury) prognostic model in 1375 patients from the CENTER-TBI database, included in 53 centers across 17 countries, with moderate or severe TBI in the prospective European CENTER-TBI study. Future prediction modeling studies in acute diseases may benefit from following the suggested five steps for optimal statistical analysis and interpretation, after maximal effort has been made to minimize missing data.
|
|
| 2. |
- Gravesteijn, Benjamin Yael, et al.
(författare)
-
Tracheal intubation in traumatic brain injury : a multicentreprospective observational study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Anaesthesia. - : Elsevier. - 0007-0912 .- 1471-6771. ; 125:4, s. 505-517
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: We aimed to study the associations between pre- and in-hospital tracheal intubation and outcomes intraumatic brain injury (TBI), and whether the association varied according to injury severity.Methods: Data from the international prospective pan-European cohort study, Collaborative European NeuroTraumaEffectiveness Research for TBI (CENTER-TBI), were used (n¼4509). For prehospital intubation, we excluded selfpresenters. For in-hospital intubation, patients whose tracheas were intubated on-scene were excluded. The associationbetween intubation and outcome was analysed with ordinal regression with adjustment for the International Mission forPrognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI variables and extracranial injury. We assessed whether the effect ofintubation varied by injury severity by testing the added value of an interaction term with likelihood ratio tests.Results: In the prehospital analysis, 890/3736 (24%) patients had their tracheas intubated at scene. In the in-hospitalanalysis, 460/2930 (16%) patients had their tracheas intubated in the emergency department. There was no adjustedoverall effect on functional outcome of prehospital intubation (odds ratio¼1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.79e1.28;P¼0.96), and the adjusted overall effect of in-hospital intubation was not significant (odds ratio¼0.86; 95% confidenceinterval, 0.65e1.13; P¼0.28). However, prehospital intubation was associated with better functional outcome in patientswith higher thorax and abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale scores (P¼0.009 and P¼0.02, respectively), whereas inhospital intubation was associated with better outcome in patients with lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores (P¼0.01): inhospital intubation was associated with better functional outcome in patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 10 orlower.Conclusion: The benefits and harms of tracheal intubation should be carefully evaluated in patients with TBI to optimisebenefit. This study suggests that extracranial injury should influence the decision in the prehospital setting, and level ofconsciousness in the in-hospital setting.Clinical trial registration: NCT02210221.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sewalt, Charlie Aletta, et al.
(författare)
-
Primary versus early secondary referral to a specialized neurotrauma center in patients with moderate/severe traumatic brain injury : a CENTER TBI study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1757-7241. ; 29:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Prehospital care for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) varies with some emergency medical systems recommending direct transport of patients with moderate to severe TBI to hospitals with specialist neurotrauma care (SNCs). The aim of this study is to assess variation in levels of early secondary referral within European SNCs and to compare the outcomes of directly admitted and secondarily transferred patients.METHODS: Patients with moderate and severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale < 13) from the prospective European CENTER-TBI study were included in this study. All participating hospitals were specialist neuroscience centers. First, adjusted between-country differences were analysed using random effects logistic regression where early secondary referral was the dependent variable, and a random intercept for country was included. Second, the adjusted effect of early secondary referral on survival to hospital discharge and functional outcome [6 months Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE)] was estimated using logistic and ordinal mixed effects models, respectively.RESULTS: A total of 1347 moderate/severe TBI patients from 53 SNCs in 18 European countries were included. Of these 1347 patients, 195 (14.5%) were admitted after early secondary referral. Secondarily referred moderate/severe TBI patients presented more often with a CT abnormality: mass lesion (52% vs. 34%), midline shift (54% vs. 36%) and acute subdural hematoma (77% vs. 65%). After adjusting for case-mix, there was a large European variation in early secondary referral, with a median OR of 1.69 between countries. Early secondary referral was not associated with functional outcome (adjusted OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.78-1.69), nor with survival at discharge (1.05, 0.58-1.90).CONCLUSIONS: Across Europe, substantial practice variation exists in the proportion of secondarily referred TBI patients at SNCs that is not explained by case mix. Within SNCs early secondary referral does not seem to impact functional outcome and survival after stabilisation in a non-specialised hospital. Future research should identify which patients with TBI truly benefit from direct transportation.
|
|
