MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059968718 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e31824079ea

Pediatric Noncontiguous Spinal Injuries

2011· review· en· W2059968718 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory B. Firth, Stephen Kingwell, Paul J. Moroz

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Abuse and Related Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaObject Research Systems (Canada)Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInjury preventionPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthRachisMedical emergencySurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and clinical characteristics of noncontiguous spinal injuries (NCSI) in a pediatric population. The secondary objective is to identify high-risk patients requiring further imaging to rule out NCSI. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: NCSI can add significant complexity to the diagnosis, management, and outcome of children. There is very little in the pediatric literature examining the nature, associated risk factors, management, and outcomes of NCSI. METHODS: All children up to 18 years of age with a spinal injury, as defined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes, at one pediatric trauma hospital were included (n = 211). Data for patient demographics, mechanism of injury, spinal levels involved, extent of neurological injury and recovery, associated injuries, medical complications, treatment, and outcome were recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-five (11.8%) of 211 patients had NCSI, with a median age of 13.0 years (interquartile range = 8-15). The most common pattern of injury was a double thoracic noncontiguous injury. Sixteen percent of the cases of NCSI were initially missed, with no clinical deterioration due to missed diagnosis. Associated injuries occurred in 44% of patients with NCSI. Twenty-four percent of patients with multiple NCSI had a neurological injury compared with 9.7% in patients with single-level or contiguous injuries (P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: There is a high incidence of children with multiple NCSI who are more likely to experience neurological injuries compared with patients with single-level or contiguous spinal injuries. Patients with a single-level spinal injury on existing imaging with an associated neurological injury should undergo at least plain films of the entire spine to exclude noncontiguous injuries. In patients without neurological injury and a single spinal fracture, radiography showing at least 4 levels above and below the fracture should be performed. All children with spinal injury should have associated injuries carefully excluded.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.293 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicChild Abuse and Related TraumaFrench-language works237,207