Why have recent trials of neuroprotective agents in head injury failed to show convincing efficacy? A pragmatic analysis and theoretical considerations
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.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 July 2019.
All research outputs
#10,045,128
of 31,078,525 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgery
#2,544
of 7,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,918
of 46,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgery
#9
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,078,525 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 46,666 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
