Management of adult splenic injuries in Ontario: a population-based study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the population-based incidence of splenic injuries in the Province of Ontario, the proportion of splenic injuries treated by observation, splenectomy and splenorrhaphy, changes in management over time and the variation in management of splenic injuries among Ontario hospitals. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS: All adults (older than 16 years) admitted with a diagnosis of splenic injury (clinical modification of the International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision) to acute care hospitals in Ontario between 1991 and 1994, identified from the Ontario Trauma Registry. RESULTS: The incidence of splenic injury was 1.7 cases per 1000 trauma admissions per year. Patients with splenic injury were young (median age 32 years) and male (71%), and the death rate was 8%. Observation was the commonest method of treatment (69%), followed by splenectomy (28%) and splenorrhaphy (4%). The use of observation increased over the study period from 59% to 75% (p < 0.001). There was significant variation in the use of observation among hospitals (range 11% to 100%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of splenic injuries are managed by observation with an acceptable hospital death rate. The use of observation has increased over time, confirming the growing adoption of this management approach by most hospitals in the province when feasible. Splenorrhaphy was infrequently performed despite reports to the contrary from many centres in the United States. There was significant variation in splenic injury management, suggesting the need for further refinement and dissemination of practical guidelines for splenic salvage.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".