MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prospective Evaluation of Computed Tomographic Scanning for the Spinal Clearance of Obtunded Trauma Patients: Preliminary Results

2004· article· en· W2083546852 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiographyGlasgow Coma ScaleRadiologyTrauma centerProspective cohort studyBlunt traumaComputed tomographicNuclear medicineSurgeryComputed tomographyRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Screening methods for detecting cervical spine injury in obtunded ventilated patients continue to evolve. This study compared the use of plain radiography to computed tomographic (CT) scanning of cervical spines in the obtunded blunt trauma patient. The accuracy of plain radiography and CT scanning in detecting clinically significant cervical spine injury in the obtunded blunt trauma patient was evaluated. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study with a 3-year convenience sample. The study population consisted of a high-risk subpopulation of severely injured patients, intubated or with a Glasgow Coma Scale score < 9 at presentation. Patients were assessed with a three-view cervical spine series and a CT scan of their cervical spines from the skull base to T1. Independent-blinded review of plain radiographs and CT scans was performed by two radiologists. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of plain films were compared with CT scanning. Sensitivity of CT scanning was compared with discharge diagnosis of cervical spine or cord injury. RESULTS: One hundred two patients were eligible and underwent three-view plain radiography and CT scanning. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of plain films compared with CT scanning were 39%, 98%, and 88%, respectively. CT scanning was 100% sensitive in detecting cervical spine injury. CONCLUSION: CT scanning in conjunction with plain films enhances the number of cervical spine injuries seen radiographically. Application of a protocol of plain radiographs and CT scanning may be used to clear cervical spines in the obtunded trauma patient. Ongoing evaluation of this protocol is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.331 · 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