MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989136662 · doi:10.3171/2013.11.spine13733

Comparative effectiveness of surgical versus nonoperative management of unilateral, nondisplaced, subaxial cervical spine facet fractures without evidence of spinal cord injury

2014· article· en· W1989136662 on OpenAlex
Bizhan Aarabi, Stuart E. Mirvis, K. Shanmuganathan, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Cassandra J. Holmes, Noori Akhtar‐Danesh, Michael G. Fehlings, Marcel F. Dvorak

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

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Spine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFacet (psychology)Sagittal planeTrauma centerSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyCervical vertebraeSpinal cord injuryFacet jointSpinal cordRadiologyLumbar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECT: Facet joints are major stabilizers of cervical motion allowing for effortless and pain-free multidimensional cervical spine movements without significant linear or rotational translation, thus minimizing any chance for spinal cord or nerve root impingement. Unilateral, nondisplaced subaxial facet fractures do not meet the conventional criteria for spinal instability under physiological loads. Limited evidence indicates that even with no or minimal displacement, 20%-80% of these fractures fail nonoperative management. The risk factors for instability in isolated nondisplaced subaxial facet fractures remain uncertain. In this retrospective study of prospectively collected data, the authors attempted to identify the predictors of failure in the management of isolated, nondisplaced subaxial facet fractures admitted to their Level I trauma center over a 10-year period. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, imaging, and follow-up data for 25 patients with unilateral nondisplaced subaxial facet fractures who were managed surgically (n = 10) or nonoperatively (n = 15) were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 38 years, 19 were male, and 21 of the fractures were the result of either motor vehicle accidents or falls. The mean motor score on the American Spinal Injury Association scale was 99.2, and the mean Subaxial Injury Classification (SLIC) severity score was 3 (operated 3.5, nonoperated 2.3). Allen mechanistic classification included 22 compressive-extension Stage 1 and 2 distractive-extension Stage 1 fractures. Subaxial facet fractures involved C-7 in 17 patients (68%), C-6 in 7 (28%), and C-3 in 1 (4%). The anatomical plane of fracture through the lateral mass was sagittal in 12 patients, axial in 8, and coronal in 3 patients. Nondisplaced floating lateral mass injuries were noted in 2 patients. The mean instability score, considering 7 components of the discoligamentous complex on MRI, was 3.2 (operated 3.6, nonoperated 3.0). Ten (40%) of 25 patients in this investigation did not have successful management, 9 in the nonoperated and 1 in the operated group (p = 0.018). Unsuccessful management was significantly greater in younger patients (p = 0.0008), possibly indicating selection bias (p = 0.07, Wilcoxon ranksum test). Fracture plane, instability, and SLIC scores did not play a significant role in treatment failure in this study. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, surgery was superior to nonoperative management of isolated, nondisplaced, or minimally displaced subaxial cervical spine facet fractures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.351 · 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