↓ Skip to main content

Predictive modeling in pediatric traumatic brain injury using machine learning

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

16 tweeters
2 Facebook pages
1 Google+ user


28 Dimensions

Readers on

49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Predictive modeling in pediatric traumatic brain injury using machine learning
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12874-015-0015-0
Pubmed ID

Shu-Ling Chong, Nan Liu, Sylvaine Barbier, Marcus Eng Hock Ong


Pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) constitutes a significant burden and diagnostic challenge in the emergency department (ED). While large North American research networks have derived clinical prediction rules for the head injured child, these may not be generalizable to practices in countries with traditionally low rates of computed tomography (CT). We aim to study predictors for moderate to severe TBI in our ED population aged < 16 years. This was a retrospective case-control study based on data from a prospective surveillance head injury database. Cases were included if patients presented from 2006 to 2014, with moderate to severe TBI. Controls were age-matched head injured children from the registry, obtained in a 4 control: 1 case ratio. These children remained well on diagnosis and follow up. Demographics, history, and physical examination findings were analyzed and patients followed up for the clinical course and outcome measures of death and neurosurgical intervention. To predict moderate to severe TBI, we built a machine learning (ML) model and a multivariable logistic regression model and compared their performances by means of Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis. There were 39 cases and 156 age-matched controls. The following 4 predictors remained statistically significant after multivariable analysis: Involvement in road traffic accident, a history of loss of consciousness, vomiting and signs of base of skull fracture. The logistic regression model was created with these 4 variables while the ML model was built with 3 extra variables, namely the presence of seizure, confusion and clinical signs of skull fracture. At the optimal cutoff scores, the ML method improved upon the logistic regression method with respect to the area under the ROC curve (0.98 vs 0.93), sensitivity (94.9% vs 82.1%), specificity (97.4% vs 92.3%), PPV (90.2% vs 72.7%), and NPV (98.7% vs 95.4%). In this study, we demonstrated the feasibility of using machine learning as a tool to predict moderate to severe TBI. If validated on a large scale, the ML method has the potential not only to guide discretionary use of CT, but also a more careful selection of head injured children who warrant closer monitoring in the hospital.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Master 7 14%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Engineering 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 16 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 April 2015.
All research outputs
of 16,650,962 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
of 1,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 264,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,650,962 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,575 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,137 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them