Evidence Hub

Diagnostic accuracy of the Scandinavian guidelines for minor and moderate head trauma in children: a prospective, pragmatic, validation study

Fredrik Wickbom, Rakel Bremell, S. Thornberg, J. Sotoca Fernandez, Beatrice M. Magnusson, Rasmus Silfver, A. Chaudhry, Kristoffer Kjellröier et al.

The Lancet Regional Health - Europe, 2025

3,012 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Current guidelines for initial management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) support decision making, but they are rarely validated. The Scandinavian guideline for management of children with TBI (SNC16) was developed to minimise the use of cranial computed tomography (cCT) without compromising safety, but the performance of the guideline in a real-world population is unknown. We aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy for the SNC16 in a large, pragmatic cohort of children. Methods In this prospective, observational, international cohort study in 16 Swedish and Norwegian emergency departments (EDs), children (aged <18 years) with blunt head trauma, presenting within 24 h of injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 9–15, were prospectively enrolled. The primary outcome measure was presence of a composite variable (clinically important intracranial injury (CIII) comprised of death, neurosurgery, admission to hospital ward ≥2 days due to head injury, or intubation ≥1 day due to pathological cCT findings), all within one week from trauma. Secondary outcome measures were neurosurgery and significant trauma related findings on cCT. Findings A total of 3012 children were enrolled from April 2018 to May 2024. Nine patients fulfilled the primary variable CIII (0.30%; 9/3012), two patients required neurosurgery (0.07%; 2/3012), and 27 patients showed significant trauma related findings on cCT (0.90%; 27/3012). Point sensitivities to detect CIII, neurosurgery and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 3,012 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free