Medical Co-Morbidities, Secondary Complications, and Mortality in Elderly with Acute Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite an increasing incidence of spinal cord injury (SCI) in the elderly and evidence that age appears to influence outcome after neurotrauma, surprisingly little is known regarding clinical outcomes and secondary complications in elderly with an acute SCI. This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of age on clinical outcomes after acute traumatic SCI managed in an acute care unit by a multidisciplinary team. A retrospective chart review of all patients with acute SCI admitted to an acute care unit at a university hospital between 1998 and 2000 was performed. Data on clinical outcomes and secondary complications in younger individuals (group 1: age < 60 years) were compared to elderly subjects (group 2: age > or = 60 years). There were 28 elderly (age 60-89 years) and 30 younger (age 17-56 years) individuals. The severity and level of SCI were similar in both groups (p = 0.11; p = 0.93). Co-morbidities were more frequent in the elderly (p < 0.01). There was a trend, which did not achieve significance, for an increased incidence of secondary complications in the elderly (57.1% versus 33.3%; p = 0.11). The most common secondary complications in both groups were infections, psychiatric disorders, pressure sores, and cardiovascular complications. Mortality rates in elderly and younger individuals with acute SCI (p = 0.41) were not significantly different. Our data suggest that rigorous attention to principles of acute SCI care can minimize previously reported higher susceptibility for secondary complications in the elderly. A multidisciplinary team approach to the management of the elderly with acute SCI is essential to minimize or prevent secondary complications.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".