Tracheostomy timing in traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of tracheostomy in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is controversial; observational studies have been challenged through confounding by indication, and interventional studies have rarely enrolled patients with isolated TBI. METHODS: We included a cohort of adults with isolated TBI who underwent tracheostomy within 1 of 135 participating centers in the American College of Surgeons' Trauma Quality Improvement Program, during 2009 to 2011. Patients were classified as having undergone early tracheostomy (ET, ≤8 days) versus late tracheostomy (>8 days). Outcomes were compared between propensity score-matched groups to reduce confounding by indication. In sensitivity analyses, we used time-dependent proportional hazard regression to address immortal time bias and assessed the association between hospital ET rate and patients' outcome at the hospital level. RESULTS: From 1,811 patients, a well-balanced propensity-matched cohort of 1,154 patients was defined. After matching, ET was associated with fewer mechanical ventilation days (median, 10 days vs. 16 days; rate ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-0.75), shorter intensive care unit stay (median, 13 days vs. 19 days; RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66-0.75), shorter hospital length of stay (median, 20 days vs. 27 days; RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.86), and lower odds of pneumonia (41.7% vs. 52.7%; odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51-0.80), deep venous thrombosis (8.2% vs. 14.4%; OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.78), and decubitus ulcer (4.0% vs. 8.9%; OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26-0.71) but no significant difference in pulmonary embolism (1.8% vs. 3.3%; OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.24-1.10). Hospital mortality was similar between both groups (8.4% vs. 6.8%; OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.80-1.96). Results were consistent using several alternate analytic methods. CONCLUSION: In this observational study, ET was associated with a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, and hospital stay but not hospital mortality. ET may represent a mechanism to reduce in-hospital morbidity for patients with TBI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level II.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".