Paediatric hanging and strangulation injuries: A 10-year retrospective description of clinical factors and outcomes
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".