Open Clavicle Fractures and Associated Injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the associated injuries, demographic distribution, and management of patients sustaining open clavicle fractures. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: A single level-1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Twenty patients with open clavicle fractures were identified from a prospectively collected orthopaedic trauma registry. INTERVENTION: All patients were managed with surgical irrigation and debridement with or without internal fixation. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (65%) had a closed head injury. Fifteen patients (75%) had a significant associated pulmonary injury. In that group, there were 10 patients who had a pneumothorax (7 bilateral). Additionally, 12 patients had rib fractures and 11 had documented pulmonary contusions or effusions. Seven patients (35%) had a cervical or thoracic spine fracture or dislocation. Eight patients (40%) had concomitant scapula fractures. Six patients (30%) had additional ipsilateral upper extremity injuries remote from the shoulder girdle. One patient had a scapulothoracic dissociation. Eleven patients (55%) sustained significant facial trauma including fractures (5 patients), lacerations, and hematomas. Fourteen patients (70%) were treated with open reduction internal fixation. Fifteen patients (75%) were followed to healing (mean: 111 wk, median: 56 wk, range: 13 to 333 wk). There were no other complications related to the operative fixations. There were no known infections or nonunions. CONCLUSIONS: Open clavicle fractures are a rare injury. Patients often have associated pulmonary and cranial injuries. Ipsilateral upper extremity and shoulder girdle injuries are common, whereas concomitant neurologic and vascular injuries are infrequent. The majority of patients have rapid and uneventful healing of their fractures after surgical treatment.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".