• Carrie Daymont, Terry P Klassen, and Martin H Osmond.
• *Department of Pediatrics and Child Health,University of Manitoba,Winnipeg,MB.
• Can J Emerg Med. 2015 Jul 1; 17 (4): 387-94.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the accuracy of physician estimates of the probability of intracranial injury in children with minor head trauma.MethodsThis is a subanalysis of a large prospective multicentre cohort study performed from July 2001 to November 2005. During data collection for the derivation of a clinical prediction rule for children with minor head trauma, physicians indicated their estimate of the probability of brain injury visible on computed tomography (P-Injury) and the probability of injury requiring intervention (P-Intervention) by choosing one of the following options: 0%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100%. We compared observed frequencies to expected frequencies of injury using Pearson's χ2-test in analyses stratified by the level of each type of predicted probability and by year of age.ResultsIn 3771 eligible subjects, the mean predicted risk was 4.6% (P-Injury) and 1.4% (P-Intervention). The observed frequency of injury was 4.1% (any injury) and 0.6% (intervention). For all levels of P-Injury from 1% to 40%, the observed frequency of injury was consistent with the expected frequency. The observed frequencies for the 50%, 75%, and 90% levels were lower than expected (p<0.05). For estimates of P-Intervention, the observed frequency was consistently higher than the expected frequency. Physicians underestimated risk for infants (mean P-Intervention 6.2%, actual risk 12.3%, p<0.001).ConclusionsPhysician estimates of probability of any brain injury in children were collectively accurate for children with low and moderate degrees of predicted risk. Risk was underestimated in infants.

31 keywords...

hide…