Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Multicenter studies are an exception in the orthopedic trauma literature. Colleagues may attempt to organize such a study to obtain large numbers of patients to answer the questions raised. Most of these studies fail to see the light of day, however, because of administrational and monetary problems. An early and notable exception was the LEAP project, which required both NIH funding, and the organizational effort by Michael Bosse and Ellen MacKenzie. Recently, The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Association (COTA) was formed as a subspecialty society, with the purpose of improving patient care through cooperative discussions and scientific studies on a national level. Because this organization is intent on answering important questions related to patient care, a scientific vehicle for multicenter clinical research was born. The key to this effort have been cooperation between the various centers throughout Canada. COTA data using this method has already been published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (Buckley et al). In this issue, Dr. Powell and his colleagues in the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Association, have put forth a remarkable effort using all the resources of their group to prospectively evaluate acute respiratory distress syndrome in the polytraumatized patient with a femur fracture. The question raised was whether reaming before insertion of an intramedullary device was contraindicated. Large numbers of patients were required: a multicenter trial was the only way to proceed. A total of 315 patients with 322 femur fractures that met criteria were enrolled in 7 separate participating centers. The data in their manuscript addresses this important question for the orthopedic trauma community. As the international orthopedic trauma community continues to grow, so does our specialty continue to mature. COTA's contribution should be seen as a noteworthy group effort. This method is the logical step to take to obtain the volumes of patients needed to definitively answer important questions. With the growth of national organizations dedicated to orthopedic trauma (as evidenced by the societies that participate in this journal), it is hoped that multicenter studies will now finally appear on a regular basis in our literature. Dr. Powell and his colleagues are to be congratulated for their work. This journal looks forward to many more nationally and internationally based multicenter studies. Roy Sanders, MD Editor-in-Chief
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».