Vaccination Practices Among North American Trauma Surgeons in Splenectomy for Trauma
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine trama surgeons' practice patterns regarding immunization of splenic injury patients. METHODS: Data were analyzed from surgeons responding to a survey sent to 557 adult trauma surgeons in the United States and Canada. The survey queried the timing and use of vaccinations in splenic injury patients. RESULTS: Three hundred four (54.6%) surgeons responded to the survey, with 43 no longer active. Of the 261 active surgeons, 99.2% immunize their splenectomized patients, whereas 15.7% immunize those who undergo splenorrhaphy and 8.4% immunize those managed nonoperatively. Vaccines are administered anywhere from the immediate postoperative period to as long as 6 weeks later. All but two responding surgeons provide the pneumococcal vaccine, 62.8% also advocate meningococcal vaccination, 72.4% add the Haemophilus influenzae vaccine, and 56.7% give all three. Thirteen of the responding surgeons reimplant splenic tissue, most frequently in the omentum, and in quantities varying from two slices to the entire spleen. Revaccination practices are extremely varied-ranging from nothing at all to annually-and seldom follow Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. CONCLUSION: With the exception of immunizing splenectomized patients against pneumococcal infection, little consensus exists among surgeons regarding the immunization of patients sustaining splenic 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it