Minimally displaced clavicle fracture after high-energy injury: Are they likely to displace?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nondisplaced or minimally displaced clavicle fractures are often considered to be benign injuries. These fractures in the trauma patient population, however, may deserve closer follow-up than their low-energy counterparts. We sought to determine the initial assessment performed on these patients and the rate of subsequent fracture displacement in patients sustaining high-energy trauma when a supine chest radiograph on initial trauma survey revealed a well-aligned clavicle fracture. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of trauma alert patients who sustained a midshaft clavicle fracture (AO/OTA type 15-B) with less than 100% displacement treated at a single level 1 trauma centre between 2005 and 2010. We compared fracture displacement on initial supine chest radiographs and follow-up radiographs. Orthopedic consultation and the type of imaging studies obtained were also recorded. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients with clavicle fractures met the inclusion criteria. On follow-up, 57 (60.0%) had displacement of 100% or more of the shaft width. Most patients (63.2%) in our study had an orthopedic consultation during their hospital admission, and 27.4% had clavicle radiographs taken on the day of admission. CONCLUSION: Clavicle fractures in patients with a high-energy mechanism of injury are prone to fracture displacement, even when initial supine chest radiographs show nondisplacement. We recommend clavicle films as part of the initial evaluation for all patients with clavicle fractures and early follow-up within the first 2 weeks of injury.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".