Abstract
Background There is no objective way of diagnosing or prognosticating acute traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). A systematic review conducted by Mondello et al. reviewed studies looking at blood based protein biomarkers in the context of acute mild traumatic brain injuries and correlation to results of computed tomography scanning. This paper provides a summary of this same literature using the SENSOR system.
Methods An existing review written by Mondello et al. was selected to apply the previously described SENSOR system (Kamal et al.) that uses a systematic process made up of a Google Form for data intake, Google Drive for article access, and Google Sheets for the creation of the dashboard. The dashboard consisted of a map, bubble graphs, multiple score charts, and a pivot table to facilitate the presentation of data.
Results A total of 29 entries were inputted by two team members. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values (PPVs), negative predictive values (NPVs), demographics, cut-off levels, biomarker levels, and assay ranges were analyzed and presented in this study. S100B and GFAP biomarkers may provide good clinical utility, whereas UCH-L1, C-Tau, and NSE do not.
Discussion This study determined the feasibility and reliability of multiple biomarkers (S100B, UCH-L1, GFAP, C-tau, and NSE) in predicting traumatic brain lesions on CT scans, in mTBI patients, using the SENSOR system. Many potential limitations exist for the existing literature including controlling for known confounders for mild traumatic brain injuries.
Conclusion The SENSOR system is an adaptable, dynamic, and graphical display of scientific studies that has many benefits, which may still require further validation. Certain protein biomarkers may be helpful in deciding which patients with mTBIs require CT scans, but impact on prognosis is still not clear based on the available literature.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
