ReviewCureus2025
Artificial Intelligence in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Prognostic, Diagnostic, and Monitoring Applications.
Review in Cureus, 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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and prognosis of traumatic brain injury based on brain CT scans: a systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Beyond the Black Box: Is Artificial Intelligence Ready to Reshape Neurosurgical Decision-Making? A Narrative Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for pediatric neuroimaging.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- The Meaning of Pain in the Clinical Management of Patients With Disorders of Consciousness: Is It a Neglected Issue?European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a leading cause of death and disability worldwide, with outcomes that are highly heterogeneous and difficult to predict using conventional clinical tools. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising approach to enhance diagnosis, prognostication, and management of TBI across diverse care settings. Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted from inception to September 2025. Eligible studies applied AI or machine learning techniques to TBI populations for diagnosis, outcome prediction, monitoring, or screening, with data extracted on study design, population characteristics, data sources, model architecture, comparators, and performance metrics. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the PROBAST tool. From 10,710 records identified, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. Prognostic models across emergency triage, intensive care unit, and registry datasets achieved AUCs (area under the curve) between 0.81 and 0.93, with simple logistic regression models often performing comparably to more complex machine learning methods. Imaging-based approaches, including convolutional neural networks for CT segmentation, improved prediction of therapeutic intensity but were constrained by small sample sizes and inconsistent segmentation quality. Unsupervised clustering revealed clinically meaningful phenotypes, though generalizability was variable. Pediatric applications were exploratory, with small cohorts prone to overfitting. Screening models for mild TBI demonstrated overall accuracies of 0.80-0.86 but only modest sensitivity (~0.70) for CT-positive cases. Across domains, interpretability strategies such as SHAP values and fuzzy rules showed promise; however, many studies were limited by inadequate external validation, incomplete handling of missing data, and small or retrospective single-center designs. Overall, AI applications in TBI demonstrate strong potential for improving prognostication, imaging analysis, and patient stratification, yet their clinical translation remains constrained by methodological shortcomings. Parsimonious models leveraging readily available clinical variables frequently rival more complex approaches, underscoring the importance of task-specific model selection. Future research should prioritize multicenter prospective datasets, external validation, calibration assessment, and evaluation of clinical impact to enable reliable integration of AI into TBI care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.