Time-Stamped Annotations in High-Frequency Physiological Data: Evaluating an Approach for Assessing Annotation Plausibility in the CENTER-TBI Dataset

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: High-resolution neuromonitoring data with time-stamped clinical annotations offer valuable insights into treatment responses, though reliability is limited by manual documentation. This study aims to develop and demonstrate a three-step methodological framework to evaluate the plausibility of time-stamped clinical annotations using a high-frequency dataset. The framework integrates visual inspection of reference annotations and automated classification based on predefined physiological criteria. METHODS: Annotated interventions in the High-Resolution Collaborative European Neuro Trauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) dataset were retrospectively analysed. Step 1 included visually inspecting physiotherapy and suctioning annotations to assess the overall plausibility of annotations at the patient level. In Step 2, an intracranial pressure (ICP)-based classification was applied to the period before osmotherapy annotations. Rejected annotations were those without sustained intracranial hypertension (ICP > 20 mm Hg for ≥ 5 min) beforehand. Step 3 classified the accepted annotations as effective (ICP reduction ≥ 10 mm Hg or normalisation) or ineffective on the basis of the post-annotation ICP trend. RESULTS: Across 205 patients, 15,455 annotated interventions were identified. Visual inspection (Step 1) classified 90.2% of files as having moderate or high evidence of an annotation-signal relationship and 9.8% as having low evidence. The automated analysis (Step 2) identified 388 osmotherapy annotations in 76 patients; 140 (36.1%) were rejected, and 248 (63.9%) were retained. Step 3 found that, among valid events, 67.7% were effective and 32.3% ineffective. Rejected events were more frequent in low-evidence files (57.3%%) than in high-evidence ones (18.0%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first systematic evaluation of time-stamped annotations in the CENTER-TBI high-resolution dataset. Concordant findings obtained using visual inspection and automated classification supports the credibility of both approaches and illustrates a framework for evaluating physiological plausibility, demonstrated here for osmotherapy but applicable to other annotated interventions. External validation is needed to prove the generalisability of the proposed algorithm.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.