Suppr超能文献

评估虐待后虐待性头部创伤的概率估计。

Estimating the probability of abusive head trauma after abuse evaluation.

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Penn State College of Medicine, Penn State Health Children's Hospital, Hershey, PA, United States.

Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States.

出版信息

Child Abuse Negl. 2019 Feb;88:266-274. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.015. Epub 2018 Dec 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based, patient-specific estimates of abusive head trauma probability can inform physicians' decisions to evaluate, confirm, exclude, and/or report suspected child abuse.

OBJECTIVE

To derive a clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma that incorporates the (positive or negative) predictive contributions of patients' completed skeletal surveys and retinal exams.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

500 acutely head-injured children under three years of age hospitalized for intensive care at one of 18 sites between 2010 and 2013.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of an existing, cross-sectional, prospective dataset, including (1) multivariable logistic regression to impute the results of abuse evaluations never ordered or completed, (2) regularized logistic regression to derive a novel clinical prediction rule that incorporates the results of completed abuse evaluations, and (3) application of the new prediction rule to calculate patient-specific estimates of abusive head trauma probability for observed combinations of its predictor variables.

RESULTS

Applying a mean probability threshold of >0.5 to classify patients as abused, the 7-variable clinical prediction rule derived in this study demonstrated sensitivity 0.73 (95% CI: 0.66-0.79) and specificity 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.90). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85-0.92). Patient-specific estimates of abusive head trauma probability for 72 observed combinations of its seven predictor variables ranged from 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.08) to 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Seven variables facilitate patient-specific estimation of abusive head trauma probability after abuse evaluation in intensive care settings.

摘要

背景

基于证据的、针对患者个体的虐待性头部创伤可能性的评估可以为医生提供决策依据,以评估、确认、排除和/或报告疑似儿童虐待的情况。

目的

制定一个包含(阳性或阴性)患者完成的骨骼扫描和视网膜检查的预测贡献的儿科虐待性头部创伤临床预测规则。

参与者和设置

2010 年至 2013 年期间,18 个地点之一的重症监护病房中因头部受伤住院的 500 名三岁以下急性颅脑损伤儿童。

方法

对现有、横断面、前瞻性数据集进行二次分析,包括(1)多变量逻辑回归来推断从未下达或完成的虐待评估结果,(2)正则化逻辑回归来推导一个新的临床预测规则,纳入已完成的虐待评估结果,以及(3)应用新的预测规则来计算观察到的其预测变量组合的患者个体的虐待性头部创伤概率估计。

结果

应用平均概率阈值>0.5 将患者分类为虐待性,本研究中得出的 7 变量临床预测规则显示敏感性为 0.73(95%CI:0.66-0.79),特异性为 0.87(95%CI:0.82-0.90)。接收者操作特征曲线下面积为 0.88(95%CI:0.85-0.92)。7 个预测变量的 72 种观察到的组合的患者个体的虐待性头部创伤概率估计值从 0.04(95%CI:0.02-0.08)到 0.98(95%CI:0.96-0.99)不等。

结论

在重症监护环境中进行虐待评估后,七个变量有助于患者个体的虐待性头部创伤概率的估计。

相似文献

1
Estimating the probability of abusive head trauma after abuse evaluation.
Child Abuse Negl. 2019 Feb;88:266-274. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.015. Epub 2018 Dec 11.
2
Derivation of a clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013 Feb;14(2):210-20. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e3182712b09.
3
Validation of the PediBIRN-7 clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Child Abuse Negl. 2024 Jun;152:106799. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106799. Epub 2024 Apr 24.
4
Screening for pediatric abusive head trauma: Are three variables enough?
Child Abuse Negl. 2022 Mar;125:105518. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105518. Epub 2022 Jan 22.
5
Validation of a clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Pediatrics. 2014 Dec;134(6):e1537-44. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-1329. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
6
Potential Impact of a Validated Screening Tool for Pediatric Abusive Head Trauma.
J Pediatr. 2015 Dec;167(6):1375-81.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.09.018. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
7
A Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed Abusive Head Trauma in Pediatric Intensive Care Settings.
J Pediatr. 2021 Sep;236:260-268.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.03.055. Epub 2021 Mar 31.
8
Clinical prediction rules for abusive head trauma: a systematic review.
Arch Dis Child. 2018 Aug;103(8):776-783. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2017-313748. Epub 2018 Apr 5.
10
Estimating the Relevance of Historical Red Flags in the Diagnosis of Abusive Head Trauma.
J Pediatr. 2020 Mar;218:178-183.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.11.010. Epub 2020 Jan 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Pathophysiological hypotheses of the triad in abusive infant shaking: A systematic review and analysis of corroborated cases.
Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2025 Jun 30;11:100618. doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2025.100618. eCollection 2025 Dec.
3
Promoting Health Equity for Children With Special Health Care Needs and Child Welfare Involvement.
Hosp Pediatr. 2025 Feb 1;15(2):186-193. doi: 10.1542/hpeds.2024-008075.
4
Validation of the PediBIRN-7 clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Child Abuse Negl. 2024 Jun;152:106799. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106799. Epub 2024 Apr 24.
5
An analysis of physicians' diagnostic reasoning regarding pediatric abusive head trauma.
Child Abuse Negl. 2022 Jul;129:105666. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105666. Epub 2022 May 11.
6
Diagnosis of Abusive Head Trauma : Neurosurgical Perspective.
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2022 May;65(3):370-379. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2021.0284. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
7
Screening for pediatric abusive head trauma: Are three variables enough?
Child Abuse Negl. 2022 Mar;125:105518. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105518. Epub 2022 Jan 22.
8
The role of retinal imaging in the management of abusive head trauma cases.
Int J Legal Med. 2022 Jul;136(4):1009-1016. doi: 10.1007/s00414-021-02750-5. Epub 2022 Jan 24.
9
Traumatic Head Injury and the Diagnosis of Abuse: A Cluster Analysis.
Pediatrics. 2022 Jan 1;149(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2021-051742.
10
A Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed Abusive Head Trauma in Pediatric Intensive Care Settings.
J Pediatr. 2021 Sep;236:260-268.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.03.055. Epub 2021 Mar 31.

本文引用的文献

1
Validation of the Pittsburgh Infant Brain Injury Score for Abusive Head Trauma.
Pediatrics. 2016 Jul;138(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-3756. Epub 2016 Jun 23.
2
Potential Impact of a Validated Screening Tool for Pediatric Abusive Head Trauma.
J Pediatr. 2015 Dec;167(6):1375-81.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.09.018. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
3
Validation of a Prediction Tool for Abusive Head Trauma.
Pediatrics. 2015 Aug;136(2):290-8. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-3993.
4
Validation of a clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Pediatrics. 2014 Dec;134(6):e1537-44. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-1329. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
5
Derivation of a clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma.
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013 Feb;14(2):210-20. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e3182712b09.
6
Dealing with missing outcome data in randomized trials and observational studies.
Am J Epidemiol. 2012 Feb 1;175(3):210-7. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr302. Epub 2011 Dec 23.
7
Estimating the probability of abusive head trauma: a pooled analysis.
Pediatrics. 2011 Sep;128(3):e550-64. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-2949. Epub 2011 Aug 15.
8
Bruising characteristics discriminating physical child abuse from accidental trauma.
Pediatrics. 2010 Jan;125(1):67-74. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-3632. Epub 2009 Dec 7.
9
Using hospital discharge data to track inflicted traumatic brain injury.
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Apr;34(4 Suppl):S157-62. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.12.021.
10
Incidence and demography of non-accidental head injury in southeast Scotland from a national database.
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Apr;34(4 Suppl):S126-33. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.016.

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