White Paper

The CBI-M Framework

Blue Gradient banner
Blue Gradient banner
Blue Gradient banner

A new characterization of acute traumatic brain injury:

The NIH-NINDS TBI classification &
nomenclature initiative

The Lancet Neurology. 2025;24(6):512–23. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(25)00154-1.

The summary of this publication has been prepared by Abbott.

Key Takeaways

  • A newly proposed, groundbreaking, multidimensional approach to characterizing acute traumatic brain injury. 
  • The CBI-M framework goes beyond the traditional TBI labels of mild, moderate and severe and utilizes four pillars: clinical, biomarker, imaging and modifiers. 
  • Blood-biomarker tests have been recognized by a global group of experts as an essential tool in the assessment of TBI.

Related Topics

Working group rationale

An international consortium of 94 experts including patients and stakeholders from 14 countries to develop a comprehensive framework  for acute TBI characterization.

The biomarker pillar

The NIH-NINDS group recommend the acute measurement of one or more of GFAP, UCH-L1 or S100B within 24-hours following injury, in order to alleviate resource implication of overuse of head CT scans, optimizing clinical decision-making.

CBI-M model in practice

The CBI-M framework is intended for use in patients with TBI of all severities (GCS score 3–15).

Summary

Until recently, the classification of TBI has relied heavily on the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), a 15-point scale that, while invaluable for rapid clinical assessment, reduces the spectrum of brain injury to three broad categories: mild, moderate, and severe. While the GCS remains highly relevant to clinical practice, collapsing an already simplified scale into three even more simple descriptors presents a challenge to effective assessment for a disease as complex and heterogenous as TBI.

Crucial information regarding the severity of injury can be missed as it is based on a single clinical parameter. In addition, stigma and bias can be introduced, with the labels of ‘mild’, ‘moderate’ and ‘severe’ that were originally intended to describe an acute injury being misapplied as outcomes, leading to perceptions about the severity of injury that can have lasting consequences and negatively impact people with lived experience.

Objective

To develop a robust, evidence-based model addressing the need for an updated and broadly applicable classification system for TBI to optimize the care landscape.

Methods

The initiative was primarily based on a process of multidisciplinary expert consensus across March 2022 to January 2025, informed by a literature review, and participation of many international experts, working under the premise that any novel approach to characterization should be applicable worldwide.

Results

The CBI-M framework is intended for use in patients with TBI of all severities (GCS score 3–15). Importantly, while all pillars offer important and valuable information, the NIH-NINDS group highlights both the nuances and the importance of the sequence of assessment. The clinical pillar should be assessed as the first priority, and for patients who present with a clinical indication for urgent imaging, the neuroimaging pillar should be prioritized over the biomarker pillar. In cases without, or with uncertain indication for imaging, the biomarker pillar has a greater relevance for providing evidence of brain injury, and to inform the need for CT scanning. The modifier pillar offers components that may be assessed acutely, while some may be more relevant to the chronic phase to assess recovery.

Conclusions

The BioMarker Pillar

The CBI-M framework emerges as a pivotal response to decades of challenges in TBI classification, addressing critical gaps identified over 50 years of TBI research. This paradigm shift aligns with evolving clinical needs for TBI diagnostics, emphasizing empirical decision support over traditional severity labels.

The framework’s multidimensional design allows incremental implementation while maintaining compatibility with existing clinical infrastructure. While the proposed CBI-M framework is not a finished product, it offers a promising, multidimensional instrument for the improved characterisation of TBI in response to calls from the community and recommendations of the 2022 NASEM report.

About the Author

Nih-ninds working group

The 2022 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) Roadmap for TBI called for a new, multidimensional approach to TBI classification. Responding to this call, between March 2022 and January 2025, the US National Institutes of Health–National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NIH–NINDS) convened an international consortium of 94 experts including patients and stakeholders from 14 countries to develop a comprehensive framework for acute TBI characterization.

Geoffrey manley et al., 2025

Geoffrey T Manley, Kristen Dams-O’Connor, Michael L Alosco, Hibah O Awwad, Jeffrey J Bazarian, Peter Bragge, John D Corrigan, Adele Dopierala, Adam R Ferguson, Christine L Mac Donald, David K Menon, Molly M McNett, Joukje van der Naalt, Lindsay D Nelson, Dana Piedad, Noah D Silverberg, Naini Umoh, Lindsay Wilson, Esther L Yuh, Henrik Zetterberg, Andrew I R Maas, Michael A McCrea, on behalf of the members of the NIH-NINDS TBI Classification and Nomenclature Initiative.

Let's Connect

Contact us for more information and to see how Abbott can positively impact your team. 

Explore

Clinical Chemistry

Our extensive assay menu helps physicians make timely, informed decisions throughout the continuum of care.

Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

Learn how Abbott has helped physicians evaluate suspected mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).

Alinity Family

Discover how Alinity uses powerful technology to help redefine and improve operational productivity and confidence in your laboratory.