Lower Mortality in Patients With Scapular Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this research was to compare associated injuries and mortality in multiply injured patients with scapular fractures with those without scapular fractures. METHODS: A prospectively collected database of multiply injured motor vehicle occupants with an Injury Severity Score >12 admitted to a level I regional trauma center during from January 1, 1996, to December 31, 2001, was reviewed to assess skeletal and organ injuries associated with a scapular fracture. RESULTS: Of 2,538 motor vehicle occupants, 94 occupants with concomitant scapular fractures and 2,444 occupants without scapular fractures revealed that 76.6% of motor vehicle occupants who sustained scapular fractures were males with a mean age of 44.3 years (SD=18.9). The presence of a scapular fracture reduced the risk of mortality by 44% (95%CI: 1-75%). Patients with scapular fractures had a greater proportion of flail chest injuries [relative risk (RR), 8.8; p < 0.001], clavicle fractures (RR, 4.5; p < 0.001), rib fractures (RR, 3.1; p < 0.01), spine fractures (RR, 2.7; p < 0.001), and tibia and fibular fractures (RR, 1.7; p < 0.025). The presence of a chest injury, either a pneumothorax (RR, 3.7; p < 0.001) or a pulmonary contusion (RR, 3.5; p < 0.001), was significantly more likely in patients with scapular fractures than control patients. Injuries to the spleen (RR, 2.4; p < 0.01) and liver (RR, 2.2; p < 0.025) were also significantly more common in patients with scapular fractures when compared with those without them. CONCLUSIONS: In an observational study of multiply injured trauma patients from motor vehicle crashes, we report the following: (1) scapular fractures occur 3.7% of the time; (2) the presence of a scapular fracture was associated with a lower mortality; and (3) scapular fractures should alert healthcare personnel to the presence of other injuries, such as chest injuries, clavicle fractures, rib fractures, spine fractures, tibial fractures, and spleen and liver injuries. Our findings should be interpreted cautiously, because the mechanism of the association between scapular fractures and mortality remains unclear.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".