MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030807629 · doi:10.1097/bsd.0b013e31826eacae

A Pilot Evaluation of the Role of Bracing in Stable Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures Without Neurological Deficit

2012· article· en· W2030807629 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreToronto Western HospitalOttawa HospitalUniversity of OttawaMontreal General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBraceRadiographyCobb angleSagittal planeScoliosisDeformitySurgeryBracingRandomized controlled trialOrthopedic surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, 2-center, observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: Investigate clinical and radiologic outcomes of bracing versus no-bracing in the treatment of stable thoracolumbar burst fractures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Management of thoracolumbar burst fractures depends upon clinical presentation of neurological deficit and radiographic features of fracture severity. Neurologically intact patients with mild deformity and biomechanical stability may be treated with conservative therapy. METHODS: Patients with stable (AO type A3), single level, thoracolumbar burst fractures between T12 and L2 with no neurological deficit were randomized to nonoperative treatment with a customized thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) or no-brace. Self-reported clinical outcomes of pain, disability, and health-related quality of life, and radiographic outcomes of kyphotic progression and loss of vertebral height, assessed by 2 independent reviewers blinded to treatment group, were measured at 6 months follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-three consecutive eligible patients were included (TLSO: n=12; no-brace: n=11). There were no between-group differences regarding level of injury (P=0.75) and baseline spine geometry including fractional canal compromise (P=0.49), anterior loss of vertebral body height (P=0.28), and sagittal Cobb angle (P=0.13). In-hospital stay was significantly shorter in the no-brace group (mean: 2.8±3.0 d) compared with the TLSO group (mean: 6.3±2.1 d; P=0.004). At follow-up there were no differences in anterior loss of vertebral body height (TLSO: 12.5%±10.2% vs. no-brace: 11.9%±8.1%; P=0.88), kyphotic progression (TLSO: 5.3±4.4 degrees vs. no-brace 5.2±3.6 degrees; P=0.93), adverse events, or self-reported clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Neurologically intact patients with stable thoracolumbar burst fractures treated with or without bracing had similar radiographic and clinical outcomes at 6 months follow-up. The no-brace group had shorter in-hospital lengths of stay. Conservative therapy involving early mobilization without brace immobilization may be warranted. Further studies with a larger series of patients and longer follow-up are required for conclusive findings.

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)0.002
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 score0.425

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.318 · 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