Suppr超能文献

为何近期针对脑损伤的神经保护剂试验未能显示出令人信服的疗效?一项务实分析与理论思考。

Why have recent trials of neuroprotective agents in head injury failed to show convincing efficacy? A pragmatic analysis and theoretical considerations.

作者信息

Maas AI, Steyerberg EW, Murray GD, Bullock R, Baethmann A, Marshall LF, Teasdale GM

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Academic Hospital Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Neurosurgery. 1999 Jun;44(6):1286-98.

Abstract

An overview of the results of recent trials of neuroprotective agents in head injury is presented. None of the trials showed efficacy in the general population of patients with a severe head injury. A critical analysis of the possible reasons for this failure is given. Specific attention is focused on the heterogeneity of the patient population, the importance of baseline prognostic indicators, and the problems caused by the distribution of outcome and the dichotomization of these outcomes in the Glasgow Outcome Scale. Recommendations are presented for consideration in the design and analysis of future trials in head injury.

摘要

本文概述了近期头部损伤神经保护剂试验的结果。这些试验均未显示对重度头部损伤患者总体人群有效。对这种失败的可能原因进行了批判性分析。特别关注了患者群体的异质性、基线预后指标的重要性,以及格拉斯哥预后量表中结果分布和这些结果二分法所带来的问题。针对未来头部损伤试验的设计和分析提出了建议以供考虑。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验