Abstract:Background Physician diagnoses of abusive head trauma (AHT) have been criticized for circular reasoning and over-reliance on a "triad" of findings. Absent a gold standard, analyses that apply restrictive reference standards for AHT and non-AHT could serve to confirm or refute these criticisms. Objectives To compare clinical presentations and injuries in patients with witnessed/admitted AHT vs. witnessed non-AHT, and with witnessed/admitted AHT vs. physician diagnosed AHT not witnessed/admitted. To measure the triad's AHT test performance in patients with witnessed/admitted AHT vs. witnessed non-AHT. Participants and setting Acutely head injured patients <3 years hospitalized for intensive care across 18 sites between 2010 and 2021. Methods Secondary analyses of existing, combined, cross-sectional datasets. Probability values and odds ratios were used to identify and characterize differences. Test performance measures included sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Results Compared to patients with witnessed non-AHT ( n = 100), patients with witnessed/admitted AHT ( n = 58) presented more frequently with respiratory compromise (OR 2.94, 95% CI: 1.50–5.75); prolonged encephalopathy (OR 5.23, 95% CI: 2.51–10.89); torso, ear, or neck bruising (OR 11.87, 95% CI: 4.48–31.48); bilateral subdural hemorrhages (OR 8.21, 95% CI: 3.94–17.13); diffuse brain hypoxia, ischemia, or swelling (OR 6.51, 95% CI: 3.06–13.02); and dense, extensive retinal hemorrhages (OR 7.59, 95% CI: 2.85–20.25). All differences were statistically significant ( p ≤ .001). No significant differences were observed in patients with witnessed/admitted AHT (n = 58) vs. patients diagnosed with AHT not witnessed/admitted ( n = 438). The triad demonstrated AHT specificity and positive predictive value ≥0.96. Conclusions The observed differences in patients with witnessed/admitted AHT vs. witnessed non-AHT substantiate prior reports. The complete absence of differences in patients with witnessed/admitted AHT vs. physician diagnosed AHT not witnessed/admitted supports an impression that physicians apply diagnostic reasoning informed by knowledge of previously reported injury patterns. Concern for abuse is justified in patients who present with "the triad."

The Swedish Agency for health technology-report about traumatic shaking: much ado about nothing?

Traumatic shaking: The role of the triad in medical investigations of suspected traumatic shaking

An analysis of physicians' diagnostic reasoning regarding pediatric abusive head trauma

Parents' experiences of seeking health care and encountering allegations of shaken baby syndrome: A qualitative study

Animal models of pediatric abusive head trauma

Shaking up our approach: The need for characterization and optimization of preclinical models of infant abusive head trauma

High G-Forces in Unintentionally Improper Infant Handling: Implications for Shaken Baby Syndrome Diagnosis

Outcome after severe non-accidental head injury

Validation of the scandinavian guidelines for initial management of minor and moderate head trauma in children

[Brain injury following child maltreatment syndrome in newborns and young children. Shaken baby syndrome]

Prosecuting cases of abusive head trauma in Switzerland: a descriptive study of the impact of medical documentation and delay of reporting on judicial outcome

Update on injury mechanisms in abusive head trauma - shaken baby syndrome

Abusive head trauma: The body of the iceberg – A population-based survey on prevalence and perpetrators

Diagnosis of Abusive Head Trauma : Neurosurgical Perspective

Patterns of accidental craniocerebral injury occurring in early childhood

Characteristics and associations of ocular and non-ocular manifestations of shaken baby syndrome

Addressing the oversight medical cases in low-middle-income countries: poor mention of shaken baby syndrome in Nigeria; reasons, challenges, and recommendations

Traumatic brain injury in children between 7–12 years of age

Are triage tools effective for detecting cervical spine injury in paediatric trauma patients? – A Cochrane Review summary with commentary

[Mild traumatic brain injury in children: can we predict intracranial complications?]

Retinal hemorrhage and bleeding disorders in children: A review