Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/33530
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCnossen, Maryse Cen_UK
dc.contributor.authorPolinder, Suzanneen_UK
dc.contributor.authorLingsma, Hester Fen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMaas, Andrew I Ren_UK
dc.contributor.authorMenon, Daviden_UK
dc.contributor.authorSteyerberg, Ewout Wen_UK
dc.contributor.authorCENTER-TBI Investigators and Participants,en_UK
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-30T00:03:54Z-
dc.date.available2021-10-30T00:03:54Z-
dc.date.issued2016en_UK
dc.identifier.othere0161367en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/33530-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. Methods We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. Results All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. Conclusion Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_UK
dc.relationCnossen MC, Polinder S, Lingsma HF, Maas AIR, Menon D, Steyerberg EW & CENTER-TBI Investigators and Participants (2016) Variation in structure and process of care in traumatic brain injury: Provider profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study. PLoS ONE, 11 (8), Art. No.: e0161367. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161367en_UK
dc.rights© 2016 Cnossen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.titleVariation in structure and process of care in traumatic brain injury: Provider profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers participating in the CENTER-TBI studyen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0161367en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid27571205en_UK
dc.citation.jtitlePLoS ONEen_UK
dc.citation.issn1932-6203en_UK
dc.citation.volume11en_UK
dc.citation.issue8en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderEuropean Commission (Horizon 2020)en_UK
dc.citation.date29/08/2016en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationErasmus MC Rotterdamen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationErasmus MC Rotterdamen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationErasmus MC Rotterdamen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Antwerpen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Cambridgeen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationErasmus MC Rotterdamen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000382876700016en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-84991063666en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1767705en_UK
dc.date.accepted2016-08-04en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-08-04en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2021-10-29en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorCnossen, Maryse C|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorPolinder, Suzanne|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorLingsma, Hester F|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMaas, Andrew I R|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMenon, David|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorSteyerberg, Ewout W|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCENTER-TBI Investigators and Participants, |en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|European Commission (Horizon 2020)|en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2021-10-29en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2021-10-29|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenamepone.0161367.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1932-6203en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
pone.0161367.pdfFulltext - Published Version473.73 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.