MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051273309 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100008118

The Epidemiology of Hospitalized Head Injury in British Columbia, Canada

2009· article· en· W2051273309 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Leah Phillips, Don Voaklander, Colleen Drul, Karen D. Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)PopulationHead injuryEpidemiologyDemographyIntensive care unitEmergency medicineMortality rateDemographicsPediatricsSurgeryEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This descriptive study seeks to identify the incidence rates of head injuries in a large Canadian province, given incident cases for a ten year period. It describes cases in terms of age standardized rates, demographics, and health care utilization. METHODS: The analyses were done using descriptive statistics. Incidence rates were calculated using the direct method. The indicators of hospital resource utilization were: mean length of hospital stay, number of intensive care unit (ICU) stays, and mean length of stay in an ICU. RESULTS: In the ten year period, British Columbia saw 48,753 admissions due to an incident head injury. The most common head injury diagnosis was an "Intracranial" injury. The year with the highest total age standardized rate was 1991/92 (174.18/100,000). The mean length of hospital stay was 7.4 days. Ten percent had an ICU stay and the mean length of stay was 4.4 days (+/- 4.8). The diagnosis with the longest mean length of stay was a "Fractured Skull" while of the top five E-code categories; "Motor Vehicle Traffic" had the highest mean length of stay with 12.2 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a much needed analysis of the incidence of head injuries in British Columbia. These rates can be compared to other provinces using the 2001 Canadian population as the standardized population. Our results indicate that there are certain "at risk" groups that warrant attention, in particular, younger men with lower socioeconomic standing. Indicators of health care utilization presented in the study should generate policy discussions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207