MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058957604 · doi:10.1503/cjs.049009

Metastatic disease of the long bones: a review of the health care burden in a major trauma centre

2012· review· en· W2058957604 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michael E. Kelly, Mitchell Lee, P. John Clarkson, Peter J. O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrthopedic surgeryRetrospective cohort studyDiseaseMortality rateSurgeryGeneral surgeryEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: More than 140,000 new cases of cancer are diagnosed annually in Canada, nearly half of which metastasize to bone. The implications for orthopedic oncology services are potentially huge. We reviewed the experience in a major Canadian orthopedic trauma centre treating long bone metastases. The primary aim was to quantify the caseload, and the secondary aim was to report on the methods of fixation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients treated for pathologic lesions or fracture secondary to metastatic disease over a 20-year period from July 1987 to March 2007. RESULTS: The mean number of cases treated annually was 13. Most patients came from the local oncology centre. The median length of stay in hospital was 11 days. In-hospital mortality was 14%. The fatal pulmonary embolus rate was 5% for femoral lesions. The revision rate for the operative intervention was 3%. CONCLUSION: The caseload was much lower than anticipated, likely owing to under-referring from oncology services. The high mortality rate may reflect delay in seeking orthopedic opinion, but overall the fixation methods appeared durable.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of SurgerySame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207