An analysis of burst fractures of the spine in adolescents.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burst fractures are less common in children than in adults because of the greater mobility and elasticity of the pediatric spine. Because of these spine characteristics, these fractures may behave differently in childhood than in adulthood. To try to address these differences, we reviewed our experience with 11 children (5 boys, 6 girls) treated for burst fractures. Average age at time of injury was 14.4 years. Follow-up averaged 9 years. All fractures were categorized using the Denis classification system for burst fractures. Three children had associated spinal cord injury. Five children were treated with nonoperative bedrest and casting; the other 6 children, who had the most severe burst fractures, were treated with posterior spinal fusion and instrumentation. Satisfactory functional results were found in 90% of the children at follow-up. Radiological evaluation at initial and follow-up examination showed that children treated operatively improved or maintained their fracture kyphosis (range, 12 degrees - 19 degrees). Anterior vertebral compression improved an average of 15% (range, 24%-39%). In the children treated nonoperatively, kyphosis progressed an average of 9 degrees (range, 15 degrees - 24 degrees), and anterior vertebral compression increased a further 8% (range, 36%-44%). Our results showed that (a) the children who sustained burst fractures tended to develop mild progressive angular deformity at the site of the fracture, (b) operative stabilization prevented further kyphotic deformity as well as decreased the length of hospitalization without contributing to further cord compromise, and (c) nonoperative treatment of burst fracture was a viable option in neurologically intact children, but progressive angular deformity occurred during the first year after the fracture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".