MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1864734842 · doi:10.1097/ta.0000000000000847

Outcomes of pediatric patients with persistent midline cervical spine tenderness and negative imaging result after trauma

2015· article· en· W1864734842 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Dorney, Amir A. Kimia, Megan Hannon, Kara Hennelly, William P. Meehan, Mark R. Proctor, David P. Mooney, Michael Glotzbecker, Rebekah Mannix

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsPositive Living Society of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical collarTendernessBlunt traumaEmergency departmentCervical spineTrauma centerSurgeryCervical vertebraePediatric traumaCervical spine injuryRetrospective cohort studyPoison controlInjury preventionEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence to guide management of pediatric patients with persistent cervical spine tenderness after trauma but with negative initial imaging study findings. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of clinically significant cervical spine injury among pediatric blunt trauma patients discharged from the emergency department with negative imaging study findings but persistent midline cervical spine tenderness. METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective study of subjects 1 year to 15 years of age discharged in a rigid cervical spine collar after blunt trauma over a 5-year period. We included patients with negative imaging results who were maintained in a collar because of persistent midline cervical spine tenderness. Primary outcome was clinically significant cervical spine injury. Secondary outcome was continued use of the collar after follow-up. Outcomes were ascertained from the medical record or self-report via telephone call. RESULTS: A total of 307 subjects met inclusion criteria, of whom 289 (94.1%) had follow-up information available (89.6% in chart, 10.4% via telephone call). Of those with follow-up information, 189 (65.4%) had subspecialty follow-up in the spine clinic. Of those with spine clinic follow-up, 84.6% had the hard collar discontinued at the first visit (median time to visit, 10 days). Of subjects with spine clinic follow-up, 10.1% were left in the collar for persistent tenderness without findings on imaging and 2.1% had imaging findings related to their injury; none required surgical intervention. CONCLUSION: A very small percentage of subjects with persistent midline cervical spine tenderness and normal radiographic study findings have a clinically significant cervical spine injury identified at follow-up. Referral for subspecialty evaluation may only be necessary in a small number of patients with persistent tenderness or concerning signs/symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level IV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207