...
首页> 外文期刊>The New England journal of medicine >Blast-related traumatic brain injury in U.S. military personnel.
【24h】

Blast-related traumatic brain injury in U.S. military personnel.

机译:美国军事人员爆炸相关的颅脑外伤。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

to the editor: The journey by Mac Donald et al. into the statistical intricacies of DTI raises important questions with respect to scientific and clinical clarity. How did the investigators select the 122 service members for the initial screening from approximately 7000 who were medically evacuated to Landstuhl during the study year? If 63 subjects all had "uncomplicated" concussions, why were they evacuated in the first place, and in what way are they representative of the tens of thousands of service members who have deploy-ment-related concussions who remain in theater? Were there clinical differences between those with concussion and the control subjects in terms of the severity of their injuries (e.g., hemorrhagic shock) or among the subjects with concussion (e.g., loss of consciousness) that might explain the presence of DTI abnormalities that exceeded those "expected by chance"? Most importantly, without the inclusion of a comparison group of service members who had deployment-related concussions due to non-blast-related injuries (e.g., falls or accidents), and notwithstanding speculation concerning susceptible brain regions, this study does not appear to be about the effects of blast.
机译:致编辑:Mac Donald等人的旅程。 DTI的统计复杂性提出了关于科学和临床清晰度的重要问题。研究人员如何从研究年度中从医疗疏散到Landstuhl的大约7000名中选择122名服务成员进行初始筛查?如果63名受试者都患有“简单的脑震荡”,为什么首先撤离他们,以什么方式代表着成千上万仍在战区部署与脑震荡的服务人员?在脑震荡患者和对照对象之间,在受伤严重程度(例如失血性休克)方面或在脑震荡对象(例如意识丧失)上是否存在临床差异,这可以解释存在的DTI异常超过那些“偶然”?最重要的是,在没有包括因非爆炸相关伤害(例如跌倒或事故)而遭受与部署相关的脑震荡的服务人员的比较小组中,尽管有关于易受影响的大脑区域的推测,但这项研究似乎并未关于爆炸的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号