Paediatric hanging and strangulation injuries: A 10-year retrospective description of clinical factors and outcomes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify early clinical factors that are correlated with death or severe disability in paediatric patients who have sustained an injury by hanging or strangulation. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patient records from January 1, 1997, to September 30, 2007, was conducted. Patient records were identified by International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Canada diagnostic codes for asphyxia, strangulation, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, hanging, hypoxemia, hypoxia or anoxia. RESULTS: A total of 109 records were identified. Of these, 41 met the inclusion criteria for the study. Of 19 (46%) children who were pulse-less and received cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 16 died and the survivors were severely disabled. Of the 22 (54%) children who were found with a pulse, 18 made a full recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Children who are pulseless at discovery for hanging injuries are at high risk of death or severe disability. Early clinical and neurophysiological indicators should be applied systematically to best guide clinicians and parents in their decision making.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it