Identification of Clinically Relevant Groups of Patients Through the Application of Cluster Analysis to a Complex Traumatic Brain Injury Data Set

Part of the Acta Neurochirurgica Supplement book series (NEUROCHIRURGICA, volume 122)


In neurological intensive care units (NICUs) we are collecting an ever increasing quantity of data. These range from patient demographics and physiological monitoring to treatment strategies and outcomes. The BrainIT database is an example of this type of rich data source. It contains validated data on 264 patients who suffered traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to 22 NICUs in 11 European countries between March 2003 and July 2005 [1, 6].



The authors would like to acknowledge the work of the BrainIT group of investigators and participating centres in the BrainIT data set without whom this work could not have been conducted: Barcelona, Spain: Prof Sahuquillo; Cambridge, UK: Prof Pickard; Edinburgh, UK: Prof Whittle; Glasgow, UK: Mr Dunn; Gothenburg, Sweden: Dr Rydenhag; Heidelberg, Germany: Dr Kiening; Iasi, Romania: Dr Iencean; Kaunas, Lithuania: Prof Pavalkis; Leipzig, Germany: Prof Meixensberger; Leuven, Belgium: Prof Goffin; Mannheim, Germany: Prof Vajkoczy; Milan, Italy: Prof Stocchetti; Monza, Italy: Dr Citerio; Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Dr Chambers; Novara, Italy: Prof Della Corte; Southampton, UK: Dr Hell; Uppsala, Sweden: Prof Enblad; Torino, Italy: Dr Mascia; Vilnius, Lithuania: Prof Jarzemaskas; Zurich, Switzerland: Prof Stocker.

Conflict of Interest Statement

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    BrainIT Research Group. Brain monitoring with information technology. Accessed 15 December 2012
  2. 2.
    Cohen MJ, Grossman AD, Morabito D, Knudson MM, Butte AJ, Manley GT (2010) Identification of complex metabolic states in critically injured patients using bioinformatic cluster analysis. Crit Care 14:R10CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gower JC (1971) A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics 27:857–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jain AK, Murty MN, Flynn PJ (1999) Data clustering: a review. ACM Comput Surv 31:264–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McHugh GS, Engel DC, Butcher I et al (2007) Prognostic value of secondary insults in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT study. J Neurotrauma 24:287–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Piper I, Citerio G, Chambers I et al (2003) The BrainIT group: concept and core dataset definition. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 145:615–628; discussion 628–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Steyerberg EW, Mushkudiani N, Perel P et al (2008) Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury: development and international validation of prognostic scores based on admission characteristics. PLoS Med 5:165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sorani MD, Hemphill JC, Morabito D, Rosenthal G, Manley GT (2007) New approaches to physiological informatics in neurocritical care. Neurocrit Care 7(1):45–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sullivan R (2012) Introduction to data mining for the life sciences. Springer Science + Business Media, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wainwright MS, Lewandowski R (2012) Bioinformatics analysis of mortality associated with elevated intracranial pressure in children. Acta Neurochir Suppl 114:67–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Academic Unit of Anaesthesia, Pain and Critical Care MedicineUniversity of GlasgowGlasgowUK
  2. 2.Department of Clinical PhysicsNHS Greater Glasgow and ClydeGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations