Fournier’s gangrene: A retrospective analysis of 26 cases in a Canadian hospital and literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We performed a systematic review of all cases of Fournier's Gangrene (FG) at our hospital over a 12-year period. A total of 26 cases were assessed. Our goal was to determine the mortality rate and to identify risk factors associated with FG. We also wanted to examine three potential prognostic factors in relation to patient survival, including the time delay from emergency room admission to surgery, the initial extent of the disease, and the impact of more than one debridement procedure under general anesthesia. The time between emergency room admission and the beginning of surgical debridement was not statistically different between survivors and non-survivors. The extent of surgical debridement was close to the margin of statistical significance (p = 0.07) and can be considered an index of the extent of the disease. FG extending to the thighs or to the abdominal wall carries a worse prognosis. The number of surgical debridement procedures done under anesthesia was statistically different between survivors and non-survivors. Patients were 4.8 times more at risk of dying if they are required to have more than one surgical debridement under general anesthesia. This presumably reflects persistent gangrene following initial surgical debridement, fluid resuscitation, and wide spectrum antibiotic treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".