MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010240785 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181c9464e

Isolated Transverse Process Fractures of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: A Clinically Insignificant Injury or Not?

2010· article· en· W2010240785 on OpenAlexaff
Maaike Schotanus, Joost J. van Middendorp, Allard J. F. Hosman

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSagittal planeRadiographyProspective cohort studyBlunt traumaSurgeryTrauma centerCervical vertebraePopulationRetrospective cohort studyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. Prospective single cohort study. Objective. To analyze the incidence, associated injuries, treatment outcomes and associated adverse events of isolated transverse process fractures (TPFs) of the subaxial cervical spine in a high-energy blunt trauma population. Summary of Background Data. Currently, TPFs of the subaxial cervical spine are considered to be clinically insignificant. However, this hypothesis is based on clinical experience and has never been supported by research previously. Methods. During a 32-month period, routine computed tomography scans of the spine were obtained in high-energy blunt trauma patients. Patients with isolated TPFs of the subaxial cervical spine were prospectively identified. For each enrolled patient, gender, age, mechanism of injury, trauma severity, neurologic deficit, injury levels, affected structures, treatment, radiographic follow-up, functional outcome (Cybex goniometer, neck disability index), and patient satisfaction (10 point visual analog scale) were recorded. Results. Of 865 enrolled patients, 21 patients (2.4%) had 25 isolated TPFs of the subaxial cervical spine. The seventh vertebra was involved predominantly (76%). The initial treatment regimen was unrestricted movement in all patients. No associated adverse events were observed. A follow-up of 13 to 39 months was available in 14 patients. Follow-up showed a stable and intact subaxial cervical spine in all patients' radiographs, a patient satisfaction of 9.3 (SD 1.48), a Cybex measured range of motion in the sagittal plane of 109° (SD 12.5, 95–129), the frontal plane of 70 (SD 17.8, 37–100) and the transverse plane of 144 (SD 12.5, 116–164), and a mean neck disability index score of 3.93 (SD 8.24). Conclusion. The incidence of isolated TPFs of the subaxial cervical spine was 2.4%. Unrestricted movement resulted in satisfying functional, anatomic, and neurologic outcomes without associated adverse events. This study confirms that isolated TPFs of the subaxial cervical spine can be considered as clinically insignificant and do not require treatment. In this prospective, consecutive high-energy blunt trauma population consisting of 865 subjects, 21 patients (2.4%) sustained an isolated transverse process fracture of the subaxial cervical spine. No associated complications; satisfactory functional, anatomic, and neurologic outcomes; and high long-term patient satisfaction were observed in patients with these untreated, clinically insignificant 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207