MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013783975 · doi:10.1097/bcr.0b013e318184815d

Long-Term Sequelae of Low-Voltage Electrical Injury

2008· article· en· W2013783975 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Singerman, Manuel Gómez, Joel Fish

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. John's Rehab HospitalHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWeaknessElectrical burnAnxietyEmergency departmentRehabilitationMedical recordPediatricsPhysical therapySurgeryBurn injuryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In North America, electrical injuries result in approximately 20,000 emergency department visits every year. They are the most common form of occupationally related burn injury, and the fifth leading cause of occupational fatality in the United States. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term sequelae of low-voltage electrical burn injuries. A retrospective hospital chart review was conducted among electrical burn patients, admitted to a regional adult burn centre or a rehabilitation hospital between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2003, to find new symptoms documented at follow-up visits. Telephone interviews were conducted to a random sample of these patients to document symptoms that had occurred since the injury. Thirty-eight of 39 electrical patient charts were reviewed, one was excluded because of a lack of follow-up notes. There were 35 (92%) men and three (8%) women with a mean age (+/-SD) of 45.4 +/- 13.4 years, and 8.9 +/- 10.5% total body surface area. The majority (97.4%) were work-related injuries, most of them (58%) because of low-voltage (<1000 V), most frequently electrical flash burns (55%). Neurological (81.6%) and psychological (71%) symptoms were the most common sequelae. The most frequent neurological symptoms were numbness (42%), weakness (32%), memory problems (32%), paresthesia (24%), and chronic pain (24%). The most common psychological symptoms were anxiety (50%), nightmares (45%), insomnia (37%), and flashbacks (37%) of the event. There were more patients with numbness (19 vs 59%) and nightmares (25 vs 59%) in the low-voltage group. Patients with more neurological symptoms also have more psychological symptoms. Eleven patients interviewed, reported a high incidence of neurological (82%), general (54%), and psychological (54%) symptoms, which occurred at 5.3 months, 1.7 months, and 1.5 months, respectively, after the electrical injury (EI). Electrical injured patients experience many physical and psychological sequelae after their injuries. Many of these symptoms are nonspecific, and they often do not appear until several months after the injury. Low-voltage EI produced more frequent long-term sequelae than high-voltage injuries. Frequent patient monitoring and prompt intervention of progressive changes after EI may improve the physical, psychological, and psychosocial recovery of these patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations96
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207