MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997116384 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.080280

Whiplash: Social Interventions and Solutions

2008· editorial· en· W1997116384 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Anthony S. Russell, Robert Ferrari

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2008
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsHeritage Medical Research ClinicUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhiplashMedicineWhiplash injuryPsychological interventionInjury preventionPoison controlPhysical therapySuicide preventionChronic painOccupational safety and healthPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedical emergencyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whiplash: Social Interventions and SolutionsTen years ago in The Journal, we commented that the concept of chronic whiplash as an injury was "an example of illness actually induced by society, in general, and by physicians in particular" 1 .Subsequent data have shown whiplash is an "injury" like no other, very much not in keeping with the effects of a localized disorder 2 .Second, the outcome of the acute injury depends on where you live.That is, the acute whiplash injury, thought to be not objectively demonstrable, appears to produce symptoms wherever there are cars and collisions, but chronic pain is attributed to that collision event in some cultures and not in others.For example, in Lithuania, Germany, and Greece, victims of motor vehicle collisions appear to report recovery within weeks to months rather than years 3,4 .Engineers have shown that the prognosis of acute whiplash, when analyzed in the context of traumatic principles and crash severity, is independent of injury severity.Culture, not crash, remains the best determinant of outcomes 5 .Finally, the outcome of the acute injury depends on what you expect.A large, populationbased prospective study of whiplash-injured in Saskatchewan, Canada, for example, has revealed that even after controlling for many other prognostic factors, the expectation of recovery (i.e., "I expect to recover soon" vs "I expect to recover slowly," or "I expect not to recover," or "do not know") is a strong predictor of self-reported outcome at 1 year 6 .Expectations appear to be culturally determined.Expectations of naïve subjects for the outcome of whiplash injury have been shown to be very different in North America than they are elsewhere, and are very much the same in Lithuania 7 , Germany 8 , and Greece 9 , countries with reportedly low rates of chronic whiplash.Perhaps because of expectations, social factors are important and explain why doctors and rodeo cowboys are relatively immune 10,11 .These observations have many possible explanations, but also possibly direct applications.Social interventions, such as changes in litigation and compensation schemes, Personal non-commercial use only.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207