Evidence mapPaperPMID 39627563Full record

ReviewNeurocritical care2025

Challenges with Formulating Accurate Prognosis for Patients with Severe Acute Brain Injury.

Lourdes R Carhuapoma, David Y Hwang

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurocritical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lourdes R CarhuapomaDepartment of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA. ljames15@jh.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8861-9750
David Y HwangDivision of Neurocritical Care, Department of Neurology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prognostication is fundamental to determining the intensity of care offered for many critically ill patients with severe acute brain injury (SABI). Inherent uncertainties linked to predicting outcomes for patients with SABI primarily arise from a lack of complete data regarding the natural disease/injury progression that follows various forms of SABI, stemming from early withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. This potential bias has led to limitations in using outcome data associated with clinical grading scales and a risk of perpetuating high mortality following SABI, leading to self-fulfilling prophecies. The aims of this article are to (1) review contemporary prognostication practices among clinicians for patients with SABI, (2) discuss inherent challenges in prognosticating outcomes following SABI, (3) summarize statements and guidelines from professional societies regarding SABI prognostication, and (4) identify directions for future research in prognostication after SABI.

Indexed as

Brain InjuriesCritical CareOutcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Guidelines as TopicHumansPrognosisOutcome predictionPrognosticationSevere acute brain injury

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.