Back

Default Handling of the Non-Assessable Verbal Glasgow Coma Scale Misclassifies Illness Severity in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

Gorenshtein, A.; Adiniaev, Y.; Omar, M.; Barash, Y.; Klang, E.; Daniel, O.

2026-06-23 neurology
10.64898/2026.06.20.26356135 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a universal neurologic severity score in the intensive care unit and is incorporated into APACHE, SOFA, mortality prediction models, ICU benchmarking, and quality metrics. In mechanically ventilated patients, however, the verbal component cannot be assessed. Common conventions, including assigning a normal total GCS of 15 or excluding patients with missing verbal scores, may misclassify the sickest patients as neurologically normal or remove them from analysis. Objective: To quantify non-assessable verbal GCS examinations after acute brain injury and determine how different handling conventions affect severity scoring and mortality-model performance across two independent critical care databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with acute brain injury during their first ICU stay in MIMIC-IV, with replication in eICU-CRD. A verbal examination was considered non-assessable when documented as No Response-ETT. We measured the burden and determinants of non-assessability, compared the MIMIC-IV derived GCS convention with a component-aware GCS, and evaluated mortality-model handling strategies. Results: Among 14,230 patients, 45.2% had a non-assessable verbal examination, and 47.5% of ventilated patients had no assessable verbal score in the first 24 hours. Non-assessability was strongly associated with mechanical ventilation and mortality. The MIMIC-IV derived GCS assigned a score of 15 to 42.9% of patients and placed 11.6% in the lowest severity category despite eye and motor findings consistent with GCS [≤]9. Complete-case handling excluded 28.5% of patients, who accounted for 50.2% of deaths. Similar distortions were observed in eICU-CRD/APACHE across 171 hospitals. Discussion: Default-to-normal scoring can make severely ill intubated patients appear neurologically normal, while complete-case analysis removes the highest-risk patients. Conclusion: Non-assessable verbal GCS in mechanically ventilated patients should be explicitly flagged and reported in ICU severity scores, risk-adjusted mortality models, and benchmarking systems.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.6%
2
Neurocritical Care
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.4%
3
Journal of Neurotrauma
31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.7%
4
Critical Care Explorations
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.1%
5
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.6%
6
Emergency Medicine Journal
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
7
Critical Care Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
8
Frontiers in Neurology
102 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.4%
9
European Journal of Neurology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.5%
10
eClinicalMedicine
77 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.5%
11
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.8%
12
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
13
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
14
Journal of Clinical Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
15
Journal of Neurology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
16
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
17
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
18
BMC Neurology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
19
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
20
Brain Communications
166 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
21
Journal of the Neurological Sciences
18 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
22
Clinical Neurophysiology
56 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
23
The Journal of Pediatrics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
24
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
25
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
26
Brain and Behavior
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
27
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 58%
0.6%
28
Pediatric Neurology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%
29
Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
30
Brain Sciences
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%