MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984265555 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f386f6

Current Practice in the Timing of Surgical Intervention in Spinal Cord Injury

2010· review· en· W1984265555 on OpenAlex
Michael G. Fehlings, Doron Rabin, William Sears, David W. Cadotte, Bizhan Aarabi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryDecompressionOrthopedic surgeryRespondentSpinal cordPhysical therapyDemographicsEvidence-based medicineSpinal decompressionSpecialtyIntervention (counseling)SurgeryFamily medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature and prospective survey study. OBJECTIVE: To characterize expert opinion regarding the timing of surgery for decompression of the injured spinal cord and critically summarize the evidence for early surgical intervention for acute spinal cord injury (SCI). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The optimal timing of decompressive surgery for acute SCI is controversial, resulting in considerable variability in clinical practice. Moreover, the current opinion of spine surgeons regarding the optimal timing of surgery after SCI is unknown. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of the applied preclinical and clinical published data regarding the timing of decompression following SCI. A 20-question survey was sent to orthopedic and neurosurgical spine surgeons across the world. Response frequencies were compiled for respondent demographics and preference for timing of surgical decompression in 6 distinct clinical scenarios. χ2 statistics were used to compare response frequencies based on specialty and fellowship training. RESULTS: A total of 971 spine surgeons responded to the survey. In almost every clinical scenario, with the exception of central cord syndrome, the majority of respondents (≥ 80%) preferred to decompress the spinal cord within 24 hours. A complete cervical SCI would preferably be decompressed within 6 hours by 46.2% of respondents, but 72.9% would operate within 6 hours for an incomplete SCI in an otherwise identical clinical scenario. CONCLUSION: The majority of spine surgeons prefer to decompress the acutely injured spinal cord within 24 hours. The majority of spine surgeons prefer to decompress the cervical spine for patients with complete or incomplete cervical SCI within 24 hours. Early decompression (within 24 hours) should be considered as part of the therapeutic management of any patient with SCI, particularly those with cervical SCI. Very early decompression (within 12 hours) should be considered for a patient with an incomplete cervical SCI (with the possible exception of central cord syndrome).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.383 · 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