Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2014 Nov 19:22:68.
doi: 10.1186/s13049-014-0068-9.

Performance of IMPACT, CRASH and Nijmegen models in predicting six month outcome of patients with severe or moderate TBI: an external validation study

Marek Majdan  1   2 , Hester F Lingsma  3 , Daan Nieboer  4 , Walter Mauritz  5 , Martin Rusnak  6   7 , Ewout W Steyerberg  8
Affiliations
Observational Study

Performance of IMPACT, CRASH and Nijmegen models in predicting six month outcome of patients with severe or moderate TBI: an external validation study

Marek Majdan et al. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. .

Abstract

Background: External validation on different TBI populations is important in order to assess the generalizability of prognostic models to different settings. We aimed to externally validate recently developed models for prediction of six month unfavourable outcome and six month mortality.

Methods: The International Neurotrauma Research Organization - Prehospital dataset (INRO-PH) was collected within an observational study between 2009-2012 in Austria and includes 778 patients with TBI of GCS < = 12. Three sets of prognostic models were externally validated: the IMPACT core and extended models, CRASH basic models and the Nijmegen models developed by Jacobs et al - all for prediction of six month unfavourable outcome and six month mortality. The external validity of the models was assessed by discrimination (Area Under the receiver operating characteristic Curve, AUC) and calibration (calibration statistics and plots).

Results: Median age in the validation cohort was 50 years and 44% had an admission GSC motor score of 1-3. Six-month mortality was 27%. Mortality could better be predicted (AUCs around 0.85) than unfavourable outcome (AUCs around 0.80). Calibration plots showed that the observed outcomes were systematically better than was predicted for all models considered. The best performance was noted for the original Nijmegen model, but refitting led to similar performance for the IMPACT Extended, CRASH Basic, and Nijmegen models.

Conclusions: In conclusion, all the prognostic models we validated in this study possess good discriminative ability for prediction of six month outcome in patients with moderate or severe TBI but outcomes were systemically better than predicted. After adjustment for this under prediction in locally adapted models, these may well be used for recent TBI patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Calibration plots for prognostic models predicting 6 month mortality. In the figures predicted probabilities of mortality or unfavourable outcome are plotted against actual observed proportions and this relationship is shown as a curve. The dotted diagonal line shows the optimal shape of the curve where the predicted and observed values match. The triangles show observed proportions by decile of predicted probability.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Calibration plots for prognostic models predicting 6 month unfavourable outcome.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Maas AI, Stocchetti N, Bullock R. Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in adults. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:728–741. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70164-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mushkudiani NA, Hukkelhoven CW, Hernandez AV, Murray GD, Choi SC, Maas AI, Steyerberg EW. A systematic review finds methodological improvements necessary for prognostic models in determining traumatic brain injury outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:331–343. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.06.011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Steyerberg EW. Clinical Prediction Models: A Practical Approach to Development, Validation, and Updating. New York: Springer; 2009.
    1. Perel P, Edwards P, Wentz R, Roberts I. Systematic review of prognostic models in traumatic brain injury. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2006;6:38. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-6-38. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Maas AI, Marmarou A, Murray GD, Teasdale SG, Steyerberg EW. Prognosis and clinical trial design in traumatic brain injury: the IMPACT study. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24:232–238. doi: 10.1089/neu.2006.0024. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources