Table 7.
Unadjusted Analyses of uGOS, GOS, and GOS-E Using the Sliding Dichotomy Method
| IMPACT probability of poor outcome | 0–0.23 | 0.23–0.51 | 0.51–1 | Total | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| uGOS favorable dichotomization threshold | > MD | > SD | > VS | ||
| TT7, n (%) | 13 (46) | 15 (41) | 9 (39) | 37 (42) | 0.72 |
| TT10, n (%) | 11 (34) | 6 (26) | 26 (67) | 43 (46) | |
| GOS favorable dichotomization threshold | > MD | > MD | > VS | ||
| TT7, n (%) | 23 (82) | 12 (33) | 9 (39) | 44 (51) | 0.73 |
| TT10, n (%) | 19 (59) | 6 (26) | 26 (67) | 51 (54) | |
| GOS-E favorable dichotomization threshold | > upper MD | > lower SD | > VS | ||
| TT7, n (%) | 7 (25) | 16 (44) | 9 (39) | 32 (37) | 0.48 |
| TT10, n (%) | 8 (25) | 6 (27) | 26 (67) | 40 (47) |
GOS, structured interview Glasgow Outcome Scale; GOS-E, Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale; MD, Moderately Disabled; SD, Severely Disabled; TT7, 7 g/dL transfusion threshold; TT10, 10 g/dL transfusion threshold; uGOS, unstructured Glasgow Outcome Scale; VS, Vegetative State.