Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39655874›Full record

ArticleEpilepsia2025

Development of individualized risk assessment models for predicting post-traumatic epilepsy 1 and 2 years after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: A traumatic brain injury model system study.

Nabil Awan, Raj G Kumar, Shannon B Juengst, Dominic DiSanto, Cynthia Harrison-Felix, Kristen Dams-O'Connor, Mary Jo Pugh, Ross D Zafonte, William C Walker, Jerzy P Szaflarski and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Nabil AwanDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6396-9095
Raj G KumarDepartment of Rehabilitation and Human Performance, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0858-3533
Shannon B JuengstBrain Injury Research Center, TIRR Memorial Hermann, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4709-545X
Dominic DiSantoDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8815-2169
Cynthia Harrison-FelixCraig Hospital, Englewood, Colorado, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0489-4681
Kristen Dams-O'ConnorDepartment of Rehabilitation and Human Performance, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2506-0216
Mary Jo PughUniversity of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4196-7763
Ross D ZafonteDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School Boston, Pittsburgh, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1050-796X
William C WalkerDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5813-3939
Jerzy P SzaflarskiUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham Epilepsy Center, Department of Neurology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5936-6627
Robert T KraftyDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1478-6430
Amy K WagnerDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3245-6523

Funding

ACL HHS 90DP0033ACL HHS 90DP0041ACL HHS 90DP0084ACL HHS 90DPTB0009ACL HHS 90DPTB0011ACL HHS 90DPTB0013ACL HHS 90DPTB0025Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs W81XWH1810736HSRD VA IK6 HX003762National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research 90DTB0013National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research 90DTB0025Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development IK6HX002608
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAlthough traumatic brain injury (TBI) and post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE) are common, there are no prospective models quantifying individual epilepsy risk after moderate-to-severe TBI (msTBI). We generated parsimonious prediction models to quantify individual epilepsy risk between acute inpatient rehabilitation for individuals 2 years after msTBI.

methodsWe used data from 6089 prospectively enrolled participants (≥16 years) in the TBI Model Systems National Database. Of these, 4126 individuals had complete seizure data collected over a 2-year period post-injury. We performed a case-complete analysis to generate multiple prediction models using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator logistic regression. Baseline predictors were used to assess 2-year seizure risk (Model 1). Then a 2-year seizure risk was assessed excluding the acute care variables (Model 2). In addition, we generated prognostic models predicting new/recurrent seizures during Year 2 post-msTBI (Model 3) and predicting new seizures only during Year 2 (Model 4). We assessed model sensitivity when keeping specificity ≥.60, area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and AUROC model performance through 5-fold cross-validation (CV).

resultsModel 1 (73.8% men, 44.1 ± 19.7 years, 76.1% moderate TBI) had a model sensitivity = 76.00% and average AUROC = .73 ± .02 in 5-fold CV. Model 2 had a model sensitivity = 72.16% and average AUROC = .70 ± .02 in 5-fold CV. Model 3 had a sensitivity = 86.63% and average AUROC = .84 ± .03 in 5-fold CV. Model 4 had a sensitivity = 73.68% and average AUROC = .67 ± .03 in 5-fold CV. Cranial surgeries, acute care seizures, intracranial fragments, and traumatic hemorrhages were consistent predictors across all models. Demographic and mental health variables contributed to some models. Simulated, clinical examples model individual PTE predictions. SIGNIFICANCE: Using information available, acute-care, and year-1 post-injury data, parsimonious quantitative epilepsy prediction models following msTBI may facilitate timely evidence-based PTE prognostication within a 2-year period. We developed interactive web-based tools for testing prediction model external validity among independent cohorts. Individualized PTE risk may inform clinical trial development/design and clinical decision support tools for this population.

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticEpilepsy, Post-TraumaticAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentYoung AdultLASSOpost‐traumatic epilepsyprognostic modelrisk calculatorseizuretraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID39655874
PMCPMC11827721

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.