In November 2017, the Lancet Neurology Commission on Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) highlighted existing deficiencies in epidemiology, patient characterization, identifying best practice, outcome assessment, and evidence generation. The Commission concluded that C needed to address deficiencies in prevention , and made a recommendation for large collaborative studies which could provide the framework for precision medicine and comparative effectiveness research (CER).

IMPORTANCE A head computed tomography (CT) with positive results for acute intracranial hemorrhage is the gold-standard diagnostic biomarker for acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). In moderate to severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] scores 3-12), some CT features have been shown to be associated with outcomes. In mild TBI (mTBI; GCS scores 13-15), distribution and co-occurrence of pathological CT features and their prognostic importance are not well understood. OBJECTIVE To identify pathological CT features associated with adverse outcomes after mTBI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The longitudinal, observational Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study enrolled patients with TBI, including those 17 years and older with GCS scores of 13 to 15 who presented to emergency departments at 18 US level 1 trauma centers between February 26, 2014, and August 8, 2018, and underwent head CT imaging within 24 hours of TBI. Evaluations of CT imaging used TBI Common Data Elements. Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) scores were assessed at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. External validation of results was performed via the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. Data analyses were completed from February 2020 to February 2021. EXPOSURES Acute nonpenetrating head trauma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Frequency, co-occurrence, and clustering of CT features; incomplete recovery (GOSE scores <8 vs 8); and an unfavorable outcome (GOSE scores <5 vs Ն5) at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS In 1935 patients with mTBI (mean [SD] age, 41.5 [17.6] years; 1286 men [66.5%]) in the TRACK-TBI cohort and 2594 patients with mTBI (mean [SD] age, 51.8 [20.3] years; 1658 men [63.9%]) in an external validation cohort, hierarchical cluster analysis identified 3 major clusters of CT features: contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma; intraventricular and/or petechial hemorrhage; and epidural hematoma. Contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma features were associated with incomplete recovery (odds ratios [ORs] for GOSE scores <8 at 1 year: TRACK-TBI, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.39-2.33]; CENTER-TBI, 2.73 [95% CI, 2.18-3.41]) and greater degrees of unfavorable outcomes (ORs for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year: TRACK-TBI, 3.23 [95% CI, 1.59-6.58]; CENTER-TBI, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.13-2.49]) out to 12 months after injury, but epidural hematoma was not. Intraventricular and/or petechial hemorrhage was associated with greater degrees of unfavorable outcomes up to 12 months after injury (eg, OR for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year in ). Some CT features were more strongly associated with outcomes than previously validated variables (eg, ORs for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year in TRACK-TBI: neuropsychiatric history, 1.43 [95% CI .98-2.10] vs contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma, 3.23 [95% CI 1.59-6.58]). Findings were externally validated in 2594 patients with mTBI enrolled in the CENTER-TBI study. C...

No abstract

Objective: To provide an overview of prediction models for the risk of developing endometrial cancer in women of the general population or for the presence of endometrial cancer in symptomatic women. Methods: We systematically searched the Embase and Pubmed database until September 2017 for relevant publications. We included studies describing the development, the external validation, or the updating of a multivariable model for predicting endometrial cancer in the general population or symptomatic women. Results: Out of 2756 references screened, 14 studies were included. We found two prediction models for developing endometrial cancer in the general population (risk models) and one extension. Eight studies described the development of models for symptomatic women (diagnostic models), one comparison of the performance of two diagnostic models and two external validation. Sample size varied from 60 (10 with cancer) to 201,811 (855 with cancer) women. The age of the women was included as a predictor in almost all models. The risk models included epidemiological variables related to the reproductive history of women, hormone use, BMI, and smoking history. The diagnostic models also included clinical predictors, such as endometrial thickness and recurrent bleeding. The concordance statistic (c), assessing the discriminative ability, varied from 0.68 to 0.77 in the risk models and from 0.73 to 0.957 in the diagnostic models. Methodological information was often limited, especially on the handling of missing data, and the selection of predictors. One risk model and four diagnostic models were externally validated. Conclusions: Only a few models have been developed to predict endometrial cancer in asymptomatic or symptomatic women. The usefulness of most models is unclear considering methodological shortcomings and lack of external validation. Future research should focus on external validation and extension with new predictors or biomarkers, such as genetic and epigenetic markers.