Probability Of Abusive Head Trauma Research Articles

Validation of the PredAHT-2 prediction tool for abusive head trauma

ObjectiveThe validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) clinical prediction tool calculates the probability of abusive head trauma (AHT) in children <3 years of age who have sustained intracranial injuries (ICIs)...

Estimating the probability of abusive head trauma after abuse evaluation.

Evidence-based, patient-specific estimates of abusive head trauma probability can inform physicians' decisions to evaluate, confirm, exclude, and/or report suspected child abuse. To derive a clinical prediction rule for pediatric abusive head trauma that incorporates the (positive or negative) predictive contributions of patients' completed skeletal surveys and retinal exams. 500 acutely head-injured children under three years of age hospitalized for intensive care at one of 18 sites between 2010 and 2013. Secondary analysis of an existing, cross-sectional, prospective dataset, including (1) multivariable logistic regression to impute the results of abuse evaluations never ordered or completed, (2) regularized logistic regression to derive a novel clinical prediction rule that incorporates the results of completed abuse evaluations, and (3) application of the new prediction rule to calculate patient-specific estimates of abusive head trauma probability for observed combinations of its predictor variables. Applying a mean probability threshold of >0.5 to classify patients as abused, the 7-variable clinical prediction rule derived in this study demonstrated sensitivity 0.73 (95% CI: 0.66-0.79) and specificity 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.90). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85-0.92). Patient-specific estimates of abusive head trauma probability for 72 observed combinations of its seven predictor variables ranged from 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.08) to 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99). Seven variables facilitate patient-specific estimation of abusive head trauma probability after abuse evaluation in intensive care settings.

Potential impact of the validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) clinical prediction tool: A clinical vignette study.

The validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) tool estimates the probability of abusive head trauma (AHT) in children <3 years old with intracranial injury. To explore the impact of PredAHT on clinicians' AHT probability estimates and child protection (CP) actions, and assess inter-rater agreement between their estimates and between their CP actions, before and after PredAHT. Twenty-nine clinicians from different specialties, at teaching and community hospitals. Clinicians estimated the probability of AHT and indicated their CP actions in six clinical vignettes. One vignette described a child with AHT, another described a child with non-AHT, and four represented "gray" cases, where the diagnosis was uncertain. Clinicians calculated the PredAHT score, and reported whether this altered their estimate/actions. The 'think-aloud' method was used to capture the reasoning behind their responses. Analysis included linear modelling, linear mixed-effects modelling, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, intraclass correlation, Gwet's AC1 coefficient and thematic analysis. Overall, PredAHT significantly influenced clinicians' probability estimates in all vignettes (p < 0.001), although the impact on individual clinicians varied. However, the influence of PredAHT on clinicians' CP actions was limited; after using PredAHT, 9/29 clinicians changed their CP actions in only 11/174 instances. Clinicians' AHT probability estimates and CP actions varied somewhat both before and after PredAHT. Qualitative data suggested that PredAHT may increase clinicians' confidence in their decisions when considered alongside other associated clinical, historical and social factors. PredAHT significantly influenced clinicians' AHT probability estimates, but had minimal impact on their CP actions.

Rib fractures: elusive, but important

Rib fractures: elusive, but important

Acceptability of the Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) clinical prediction tool: A qualitative study with child protection professionals

The validated Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) tool estimates the probability of abusive head trauma (AHT) based on combinations of six clinical features: head/neck bruising; apnea; seizures; rib/long-bone fractures; retinal hemorrhages. We aimed to determine the acceptability of PredAHT to child protection professionals. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 56 participants: clinicians (25), child protection social workers (10), legal practitioners (9, including 4 judges), police officers (8), and pathologists (4), purposively sampled across southwest United Kingdom. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and imported into NVivo for thematic analysis (38% double-coded). We explored participants’ evaluations of PredAHT, their opinions about the optimal way to present the calculated probabilities, and their interpretation of probabilities in the context of suspected AHT. Clinicians, child protection social workers and police thought PredAHT would be beneficial as an objective adjunct to their professional judgment, to give them greater confidence in their decisions. Lawyers and pathologists appreciated its value for prompting multidisciplinary investigations, but were uncertain of its usefulness in court. Perceived disadvantages included: possible over-reliance and false reassurance from a low score. Interpretations regarding which percentages equate to ‘low’, ‘medium’ or ‘high’ likelihood of AHT varied; participants preferred a precise % probability over these general terms. Participants would use PredAHT with provisos: if they received multi-agency training to define accepted risk thresholds for consistent interpretation; with knowledge of its development; if it was accepted by colleagues. PredAHT may therefore increase professionals’ confidence in their decision-making when investigating suspected AHT, but may be of less value in court.

Validation of a Prediction Tool for Abusive Head Trauma.

Abusive head trauma (AHT) may be missed in the clinical setting. Clinical prediction tools are used to reduce variability in practice and inform decision-making. From a systematic review and individual patient data analysis we derived the Predicting Abusive Head Trauma (PredAHT) tool, using multilevel logistic regression to predict likelihood of AHT. This study aims to externally validate the PredAHT tool. Consecutive children aged <36 months admitted with an intracranial injury, confirmed as abusive or nonabusive, to 2 sites used in the original model were ascertained. Details of 6 influential features were recorded (retinal hemorrhage, rib and long -bone fractures, apnea, seizures, and head or neck bruising). We estimated the likelihood of an unrecorded feature being present with multiple imputation; analysis included sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data included 133 non-AHT cases and 65 AHT cases, 97% of children were <24 months old. Consistent with original predictions, when ≥3 features were present in a child <36 months old with intracranial injury, the estimated probability of AHT was >81.5% (95% CI, 63.3-91.8). The sensitivity of the tool was 72.3% (95% CI, 60.4-81.7), the specificity was 85.7% (95% CI, 78.8-90.7), area under the curve 0.88 (95% CI, 0.823-0.926). When tested on novel data, the PredAHT tool performed well. This tool has the potential to contribute to decision-making in these challenging cases. An implementation study is needed to explore its performance and utility within the child protection process.

Abusive head trauma and accidental head injury: a 20-year comparative study of referrals to a hospital child protection team

AimTo describe children referred for suspected abusive head trauma (AHT) to a hospital child protection team in Auckland, New Zealand.MethodsComparative review of demographics, histories, injuries, investigations and diagnostic outcomes for...

G217(P) Validation of a Proposed Clinical Tool to Estimate the Probability of Abusive Head Trauma in Children Aged Less Than Three Years

BackgroundAbusive head trauma (AHT) is the most common cause of death and disability in abused children, and presents significant diagnostic challenges. Previous research identified six individual features (retinal haemorrhage, rib...

Derivation of a Clinical Prediction Rule for Pediatric Abusive Head Trauma*

Abusive head trauma is a leading cause of traumatic death and disability during infancy and early childhood. Evidence-based screening tools for abusive head trauma do not exist. Our research objectives were 1) to measure the predictive relationships between abusive head trauma and isolated, discriminating, and reliable clinical variables and 2) to derive a reliable, sensitive, abusive head trauma clinical prediction rule that-if validated-can inform pediatric intensivists' early decisions to launch (or forego) an evaluation for abuse. Prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional, observational. Fourteen PICUs. Acutely head-injured children less than 3 years old admitted for intensive care. None. Applying a priori definitional criteria for abusive head trauma, we identified clinical variables that were discriminating and reliable, calculated likelihood ratios and post-test probabilities of abuse, and applied recursive partitioning to derive an abusive head trauma clinical prediction rule with maximum sensitivity-to help rule out abusive head trauma, if negative. Pretest probability (prevalence) of abusive head trauma in our study population was 0.45 (95 of 209). Post-test probabilities of abusive head trauma for isolated, discriminating, and reliable clinical variables ranged from 0.1 to 0.86. Some of these variables, when positive, shifted probability of abuse upward greatly but changed it little when negative. Other variables, when negative, largely excluded abusive head trauma but increased probability of abuse only slightly when positive. Some discriminating variables demonstrated poor inter-rater reliability. A cluster of five discriminating and reliable variables available at or near the time of hospital admission identified 97% of study patients meeting a priori definitional criteria for abusive head trauma. Negative predictive value was 91%. A more completeunderstanding of the specific predictive qualities of isolated, discriminating, and reliable variables could improve screening accuracy. If validated, a reliable, sensitive, abusive head trauma clinical prediction rule could be used by pediatric intensivists to calculate an evidence-based, patient-specific estimate of abuse probability that can inform-not dictate-their early decisions to launch (or forego) an evaluation for abuse.

Estimating the probability of abusive head trauma: a pooled analysis

Child: Care, Health and DevelopmentVolume 37, Issue 6 p. 897-898 Estimating the probability of abusive head trauma: a pooled analysis Richard Reading, Richard ReadingSearch for more papers by this author Richard Reading, Richard ReadingSearch for more papers by this author First published: 18 October 2011 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01319_4.xRead the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume37, Issue6Special Issue: Transition to AdulthoodNovember 2011Pages 897-898 RelatedInformation

Estimating the Probability of Abusive Head Trauma: A Pooled Analysis

To determine which combinations of clinical features assist in distinguishing abusive head trauma (AHT) from nonabusive head trauma. Individual patient data from 6 comparative studies of children younger than 3 years with intracranial injury were analyzed to determine the association between AHT and combinations of apnea; retinal hemorrhage; rib, skull, and long-bone fractures; seizures; and head and/or neck bruising. An aggregate analysis of data from these studies used multiple imputation of combined clinical features using a bespoke hotdeck imputation strategy, which accounted for uncertainty arising from missing information. Analyzing 1053 children (348 had AHT), excluding nonsignificant variables (gender, age, skull fractures), for a child with an intracranial injury and 1 or 2 of the 6 features, the positive predictive value (PPV) of AHT varies from 4% to 97% according to the different combinations. Although rarely recorded, apnea is significantly associated with AHT (odds ratio [OR]: 6.89 [confidence interval: 2.08-22.86]). When rib fracture or retinal hemorrhage was present with any 1 of the other features, the OR for AHT is >100 (PPV > 85%). Any combination of 3 or more of the 6 significant features yielded an OR of >100 (PPV for AHT > 85%). Probabilities of AHT can be estimated on the basis of different combinations of clinical features. The model could be further developed in a prospective large-scale study, with an expanded clinical data set, to contribute to a more refined tool to inform clinical decisions about the likelihood of AHT.

Estimating the Probability of Abusive Head Trauma: A Pooled Analysis

Estimating the Probability of Abusive Head Trauma: A Pooled Analysis