Severe Traumatic Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The public health implications of regional variation in incidence and outcome of severe traumatic injury remain to be analyzed. The objective of this study was to determine whether the incidence and outcome associated with severe traumatic injury differs across geographic regions of North America. METHODS: A prospective, observational study was conducted of the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium of all patients in 9 North American sites (6 US and 3 Canadian) sustaining severe traumatic injury from April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2007 followed to hospital discharge. Eligible patients were assessed by organized emergency medical services, and had field-based physiologic criteria including systolic blood pressure 29 per minute, advanced airway procedure, or traumatic death in the field. Census data were used to determine rates adjusted for age and sex. The main outcome measures were incidence rate, mortality rate, case fatality rate, and survival to discharge for patients sustaining severe traumatic injury assessed by EMS. RESULTS: The total catchment population of 20.5 million yielded 7080 cases of severe traumatic injury. Median age was 36 years and 67% were male. The median incidence of EMS-assessed severe traumatic injury per 100,000 population across sites was 37.4 (interquartile range [IQR] = 24.6-69.6); survival ranged from 39.8% to 80.8%, with a median of 64.5% (IQR = 55.5-78.4). About 942 cases were pronounced dead at the scene and 5857 patients were transported to hospital; 4477 (63.2%) were discharged alive. The median incidence of severe trauma due to a blunt mechanism, transported to hospital, was 25.8 (IQR = 13.1-44.3); survival ranged from 52.6% to 87.3%, with a median of 78.0% (IQR = 68.4-83.5). The median incidence of severe penetrating trauma, transported to hospital, was 2.6 (IQR = 1.5-10.4); survival ranged from 37.5% to 84.7%, with a median of 67.5% (IQR = 54.1-75.9). All P values for differences across sites for incidence and survival were <0.001. CONCLUSIONS: In this study involving 9 geographic regions in North America, there were significant and important regional differences in severe traumatic injury, incidence, and outcome. These differences were sustained for patients with either isolated blunt or penetrating injury mechanisms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.010 |
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".