573 Feasibility of an Unfunded Multicenter Trial Group for Older Adult Burn Patients: A Retrospective Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Older adults represent a significant portion of the burn patient population, presenting unique physiological challenges and requiring tailored treatment approaches. Yet, comprehensive data specific to this demographic are limited. The relatively small number of older burn patients at each center makes single-center studies insufficient to address key questions about their care. The development of a multicenter trial group focused on older adult burn patients could yield valuable insights into clinical outcomes, yet funding for such initiatives is often restricted. This study explores the feasibility of creating an unfunded multicenter trial group and conducting a retrospective pilot study to examine clinical trends and outcomes for older adult burn patients. Methods Following IRB approval and the creation of data use agreements, a retrospective pilot study was conducted across twelve burn centers in North America. Each center was tasked with collecting standardized data on burn patients aged 60 and older from January 2017 to December 2019. Data included demographic information, burn characteristics (total body surface area burned, type of burn, etc.), treatment interventions, and outcomes such as mortality, length of hospital stay, and complications. Where possible, data were sourced from each center’s submission to the Burn Care Quality Platform (BCQP). BCQP and additional data were manually entered into a centralized REDCap database managed by one institution. Descriptive statistics of the pilot study are presented. Results The study included 1,632 older adult burn patients. Median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR] 13); 1,095 patients (67%) were male and 1,187 (73%) were White with a median BMI of 27.5 (IQR 7.87). The median burn size was 3.5% total body surface area (IQR 9, range 0-100%). Patients presented a median of 4.68 hours after injury (IQR 15.35), with a median modified Baux score of 76.21 (IQR 20.5). These patients underwent a median of 1 operation (IQR 1), typically 3 days after injury (IQR 6). The median length of hospital stay was 6 days (IQR 13), with an ICU stay of 1 day (IQR 5). In-hospital mortality was 10.4% and the median time to wound healing was 40 days (IQR 48). Conclusions Creating an unfunded multicenter trial group for older adult burn patients is feasible. The group successfully conducted a retrospective study on care trends for burn-injured older adults. Key factors in the success of this initiative included standardized data collection protocols and strong collaboration between centers. Applicability of Research to Practice Although challenges remain, this project illustrates the potential for establishing a larger, sustainable multicenter trial group aimed at improving clinical practices and outcomes for older burn patients. Funding for the Study No financial compensation or technical support was provided to the participating institutions.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,120 | 0,129 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».