MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989632957 · doi:10.3171/jns.2002.97.3.0549

Regional differences in patient characteristics, case management, and outcomes in traumatic brain injury: experience from the tirilazad trials

2002· article· en· W1989632957 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of neurosurgery · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialTraumatic brain injuryPopulationClinical trialGlasgow Outcome ScaleReferralMortality rateLogistic regressionEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECT: Regional differences have been shown in patient characteristics and case management within multiple unselected series of patients suffering from traumatic brain injury (TBI). One might expect that such regional heterogeneity would be small in a more selected population of a randomized clinical trial. The goal of this study was to examine what regional differences in patient characteristics, case management, and outcomes exist between continents and among countries within a patient population included in a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: Data were extracted from two concurrently conducted randomized clinical trials of the drug tirilazad; the designs of these studies were similar. The studies included 1701 patients with severe and 476 patients with moderate TBI. Differences were primarily investigated between studies performed in Europe and North America, but also among European regions and between Canada and the United States. Associations among regions and outcomes (6-month mortality rate and Glasgow Outcome Scale scores) were studied using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Comparisons between continents and among regions within Europe showed differences in the distribution of patient ages, causes of injury, and several clinical characteristics (motor score, pupillary reactivity, hypoxia, hypotension, intracranial pressure [ICP]). and findings on computerized tomography scans. Secondary referrals occurred 2.5 times more frequently in Europe. Within Europe secondary referral was mainly associated with an increased proportion of patients with mass lesions (46% in the European Study compared with 40% in the North American Study). Therapy for lowering ICP was more frequently applied in North America. After adjustments for case mix and management, mortality and unfavorable outcomes were significantly higher in Europe (odds ratios = 1.58 and 1.46, respectively). Significant differences in outcome between regions within Europe or within North America were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the use of a strict study protocol, considerable differences in patient characteristics and case management exist between continents and among countries, reflecting variations in social, cultural, and organizational aspects. Outcomes of TBI may be worse in Europe compared with North America, but this finding requires further study.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.191 · 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