MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074251985 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f330ae

Classification and Surgical Decision Making in Acute Subaxial Cervical Spine Trauma

2010· review· en· W2074251985 on OpenAlexaff
Alpesh A. Patel, R. John Hurlbert, Christopher M. Bono, Jason T. Bessey, Nuo Yang, Alexander R. Vaccaro

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical spineCervical spine injuryCervical vertebraeSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. Retrospective case series, literature review. Objective. To describe and apply an optimal classification system for the management of subaxial cervical trauma. Summary of Background Data. Traumatic injury to the subaxial cervical trauma is common yet diagnosis and treatment choices remain controversial. The lack of a widely accepted classification system contributes to the variation in care. Methods. Two clinically relevant questions pertaining to the subaxial spine were developed by consensus from a panel of fellowship-trained spine trauma surgeons. A literature review identified published treatment algorithms for subaxial cervical trauma. Consecutive cases presenting to 2 tertiary trauma centers representing a spectrum of commonly observed, clinically relevant injury patterns were analyzed and the subaxial cervical injury classification system (SLIC) applied. Three representative clinical scenarios of subaxial trauma are presented to demonstrate utilization of the treatment algorithm. Results. Literature review identified only 1 classification and treatment algorithm that met all inclusion criteria. Sixty-five consecutive subaxial cervical trauma cases were identified from which 10 representative injury patterns were selected and described according to the SLIC classification system. This was applied to clinical scenarios and treatment algorithms derived. Conclusion. The SLIC system can be used to reliably and effectively classify subaxial cervical trauma. The treatment algorithm described by Dvorak et al, Spine 2007;32:2620–9, can be used to guide surgical decision-making including surgical approach and the sequence of procedures based on injury type. An optimal classification system for subaxial cervical trauma remains controversial. The advantages of the subaxial cervical injury classification system are reviewed, and the system has been applied to a consecutive series of trauma patients. Additionally, an algorithm for surgical decision-making in subaxial cervical trauma is applied to 3 clinical scenarios to determine optimal treatment of differing injury patterns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations71
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207