MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966708153 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e31823881d6

The Risk Assessment Score in Acute Whiplash Injury Predicts Outcome and Reflects Biopsychosocial Factors

2011· article· en· W1966708153 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helge Kasch, Erisela Qerama, Alice Kongsted, Flemming W. Bach, Tom Bendix, Troels S. Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWhiplashBiopsychosocial modelPhysical therapyProspective cohort studyAnkleOutcome (game theory)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlEmergency medicineInternal medicineSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. One-year prospective study of 141 acute whiplash patients (WLP) and 40 acute ankle-injured controls. Objective. This study investigates a priori determined potential risk factors to develop a risk assessment tool, for which the expediency was examined. Summary of Background Data. The whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) grading system that emerged from The Quebec Task-Force-on-Whiplash has been of limited value for predicting work-related recovery and for explaining biopsychosocial disability after whiplash and new predictive factors, for example, risk criteria that comprehensively differentiate acute WLP in a biopsychosocial manner are needed. Methods. Consecutively, 141 acute WLP and 40 ankle-injured recruited from emergency units were examined after 1 week, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months obtaining neck/head visual analog scale score, number of nonpainful complaints, epidemiological, social, psychological data and neurological examination, active neck mobility, and furthermore muscle tenderness and pain response, and strength and duration of neck muscles. Risk factors derived (reduced cervical range of motion, intense neck pain/headache, multiple nonpain complaints) were applied in a risk assessment score and divided into seven risk strata. Results. A receiver operating characteristics curve for the Risk Assessment Score and 1-year work disability showed an area of 0.90. Risk strata and number of sick days showed a log-linear relationship. In stratum 1 full recovery was encountered, but for high-risk patients in stratum 6 only 50% and 7 only 20% had returned to work after 1 year (P < 5.4 × 10−5). Strength measures, psychophysical pain measurements, and psychological and social data (reported elsewhere) showed significant relation to risk strata. Conclusion. The Risk Assessment score is suggested as a valuable tool for grading WLP early after injury. It has reasonable screening power for encountering work disability and reflects the biopsychosocial nature of whiplash injuries. The risk assessment score screening for development of long-term work disability after acute whiplash injury was developed on the basis of a priori defined risk factors. Risk factors were reduced neck mobility, intense neck pain/headache, and multiple nonpain complaints. The developed risk assessment score was strongly related to work disability and in concordance with biopychosocial factors.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations45
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207