Clinical Outcome of Patients With Severe Burns Presenting to the Emergency Department
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 : Burns are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although a local burn covering a limited surface area can heal readily, deep or extensive burns can result in systemic damage and even death. This study evaluated the clinical characteristics of the patients presenting with severe burns and investigated the factors influencing mortality. Methods: The data for 1003 patients who presented with symptoms of severe burn to a tertiary care university hospital in Turkey between 2006 and 2007 were evaluated retrospectively. Results: The overall patient mortality was 7.7% (n = 78). The effect of male gender and age on mortality was significant. The highest mortality rate was in the group aged > 40 years. A burned area larger than 21% of the body surface conferred a high risk of mortality. A hospital stay for longer than 10 days, the presence of delirium at the time of presentation, hyperuricemia, the need for debriding, grafting, or fasciotomy, sepsis, hypovolemic shock, and a positive blood culture were significant predictors of mortality. Conclusions : Severe burns have to be treated in a burn unit or burn center. As the prevention of burns is important, it is important to identify the region-specific causes of burns and the risk factors that influence mortality. doi:10.4021/jcs19e
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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