Accuracy of Clinician Practice Compared With Three Head Injury Decision Rules in Children: A Prospective Cohort Study
Abstract
Study objective: Three clinical decision rules for head injuries in children (Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network [PECARN], Canadian Assessment of Tomography for Childhood Head Injury [CATCH], and Children’s Head Injury Algorithm for the Prediction of Important Clinical Events [CHALICE]) have been shown to have high performance accuracy. The utility of any of these in a particular setting depends on preexisting clinician accuracy. We therefore assess the accuracy of clinician practice in detecting clinically important traumatic brain injury. Methods: This was a planned secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of children younger than 18 years with head injuries at 10 Australian and New Zealand centers. In a cohort of children with mild head injuries (Glasgow Coma Scale score 13 to 15, presenting in <24 hours) we assessed physician accuracy (computed tomography [CT] obtained in emergency departments [EDs]) for the standardized outcome of clinically important traumatic brain injury and compared this with the accuracy of PECARN, CATCH, and CHALICE. Results: Of 20,137 children, 18,913 had a mild head injury. Of these patients, 1,579 (8.3%) received a CT scan during the ED visit, 160 (0.8%) had clinically important traumatic brain injury, and 24 (0.1%) underwent neurosurgery. Clinician identification of clinically important traumatic brain injury based on CT performed had a sensitivity of 158 of 160, or 98.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95.6% to…
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: 20,137 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- A meta‐analysis of anal cancer incidence by risk group: Toward a unified anal cancer risk scale
- Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
- Exercise interventions in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Prognostic Significance of Carbonic Anhydrase IX Expression in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
- Glucocorticoid Resistance: Is It a Requisite for Increased Cytokine Production in Depression? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
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.