Interobserver Reliability of the Young-Burgess and Tile Classification Systems for Fractures of the Pelvic Ring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to measure interobserver reliability of 2 classification systems of pelvic ring fractures and to determine whether computed tomography (CT) improves reliability. The reliability of several radiographic findings was also tested. METHODS: Thirty patients taken from a database at a Level I trauma facility were reviewed. For each patient, 3 radiographs (AP pelvis, inlet, and outlet) and CT scans were available. Six different reviewers (pelvic and acetabular specialist, orthopaedic traumatologist, or orthopaedic trainee) classified the injury according to Young-Burgess and Tile classification systems after reviewing plain radiographs and then after CT scans. The Kappa coefficient was used to determine interobserver reliability of these classification systems before and after CT scan. RESULTS: For plain radiographs, overall Kappa values for the Young-Burgess and Tile classification systems were 0.72 and 0.30, respectively. For CT scan and plain radiographs, the overall Kappa values for the Young-Burgess and Tile classification systems were 0.63 and 0.33, respectively. The pelvis/acetabular surgeons demonstrated the highest level of agreement using both classification systems. For individual questions, the addition of CT did significantly improve reviewer interpretation of fracture stability. The pre-CT and post-CT Kappa values for fracture stability were 0.59 and 0.93, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The CT scan can improve the reliability of assessment of pelvic stability because of its ability to identify anatomical features of injury. The Young-Burgess system may be optimal for the learning surgeon. The Tile classification system is more beneficial for specialists in pelvic and acetabular surgery.
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 | 0.029 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".