Interrater Reliability of NIH TBI Imaging Common Data Elements for Brain MRI in Mild TBI.

The National Institutes of Health-National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NIH-NINDS) Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Imaging Common Data Elements (CDE) are standardized definitions for pathological intracranial lesions based on their appearance on neuroimaging studies. The NIH-NINDS TBI Imaging CDEs were designed to be as consistent as possible with the FDA definition of biomarkers as "an indicator of normal biological processes, pathogenic processes, or biological responses to an exposure or intervention." However, the FDA qualification process for biomarkers requires proof of reliable biomarker test measurements. We determined the interrater reliability of TBI Imaging CDEs on subacute brain MRI performed on 517 mild TBI patients presenting to 11 U.S. Level 1 trauma centers. Three U.S. board-certified neuroradiologists independently evaluated brain MRI performed 2 weeks postinjury for the following CDEs: traumatic axonal injury (TAI), diffuse axonal injury (DAI), and brain contusion. We found very high interrater agreement for brain contusion, with prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) values for pairs of readers from 0.92 [95% CI 0.88-0.95] to 0.94 [0.90-0.96]. We found intermediate agreement for traumatic and diffuse axonal injury (TAI and DAI), with PABAK values of 0.74-0.78 [0.70-0.82]. The near-perfect agreement for brain contusion is likely due to the high conspicuity and distinctive appearance of these lesions on T1-weighted images. Interrater agreement for TAI and DAI was lower, because signal void in small vascular structures, and artifactual foci of signal void, can be difficult to distinguish from the punctate round or linear areas of slight hemorrhage that are a common hallmark of TAI/DAI on MRI.

[1]  B. M. ter Haar Romeny,et al.  Automated detection of cerebral microbleeds in patients with Traumatic Brain Injury , 2016, NeuroImage: Clinical.

[2]  J. Huff,et al.  Differences in interpretation of cranial computed tomography in ED traumatic brain injury patients by expert neuroradiologists. , 2014, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[3]  Pratik Mukherjee,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging improves 3‐month outcome prediction in mild traumatic brain injury , 2012, Annals of neurology.

[4]  M. Wintermark,et al.  Common data elements in radiologic imaging of traumatic brain injury. , 2010, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[5]  R. Hurley,et al.  Common data elements in radiologic imaging of traumatic brain injury , 2010, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[6]  G. Iverson Mild traumatic brain injury meta-analyses can obscure individual differences , 2010, Brain injury.

[7]  G. Manley,et al.  Interobserver variability in the assessment of CT imaging features of traumatic brain injury. , 2010, Journal of neurotrauma.

[8]  Bejoy Thomas,et al.  Principles, techniques, and applications of T2*-based MR imaging and its special applications. , 2009, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[9]  G. Manley,et al.  Classification of traumatic brain injury for targeted therapies. , 2008, Journal of neurotrauma.

[10]  J. Borg,et al.  Prognosis for mild traumatic brain injury: results of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[11]  G. Murray,et al.  Disability in young people and adults one year after head injury: prospective cohort study , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.