Vehicle factors and outcomes associated with hand-out-window motor vehicle collisions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients can experience devastating injuries when an upper extremity travels out of a window during a motor vehicle collision. These injuries are typically very severe and may even result in loss of the affected limb. The purposes of this retrospective study were to determine the clinical fate of these extremities and analyze for common factors during the collisions. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 20 patients between 2003 and 2010, evaluating the patient's age, arm involvement, number and types of surgeries, as well as the Mangled Extremity Severity Score (MESS) was conducted. In addition, patients were contacted to survey them about accident and vehicle factors and to complete the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (quickDASH) survey. The data were then analyzed for common factors. RESULTS: The mean age of the 20 patients involved was 28.8 years. There were 11 men and 9 women. The mean MESS was 5.4. Two patients required amputation of some form. Fifteen patients were wearing a seatbelt at time of collision, four were not, and the restraint status of one patient is unknown. The closest extremity to the window was involved in 18 (90%) of 20 patients. Vehicle rollover was the most common mechanism of injury with 16 patients (80%) involved, while 4 patients (20%) were involved in head-on or side-impact type collisions. The average quickDASH score was 24 (range, 5-91). CONCLUSION: The hand-out-of-the-window phenomenon during motor vehicle crashes results in very serious injury to the affected extremity. Most patients were involved in rollover accidents, and most were wearing a seatbelt. The arm closest to the window was nearly always involved. The mean MESS is high in these patients but did not necessarily correlate with amputation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level IV.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".