MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117650291 · doi:10.3109/10903127.2012.695431

The Impact of Distance on Triage to Trauma Center Care in an Urban Trauma System

2012· article· en· W2117650291 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital Emergency Care · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTrauma centerTriageMedicineEmergency medical servicesMajor traumaEmergency medicineInjury Severity ScoreMedical emergencyLogistic regressionPoison controlTrauma carePopulationRetrospective cohort studyInjury preventionSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Urban trauma systems are characterized by high population density, availability of trauma centers, and acceptable road transport times (within 30 minutes). In such systems, patients meeting field trauma triage (FTT) criteria should be transported directly to a trauma center, bypassing closer non-trauma centers. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated emergency medical services (EMS) triage practices to identify opportunities for improving care delivery. OBJECTIVE: Specifically, we evaluated the effect of the additional distance to a trauma center, compared with a closer non-trauma center, on the noncompliance with trauma destination criteria by EMS personnel in an urban environment. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults having at least one physiologic derangement and meeting Toronto EMS field trauma triage criteria from 2005 to 2010. Road travel distances between the site of injury, the closest non-trauma center, and the closest trauma center were estimated using geographic information systems. For patients who were transported to non-trauma centers, we estimated "differential distance": the additional travel distance required to transport directly to a trauma center. Logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of differential distance on triage decisions, adjusting for other patient characteristics. RESULTS: Inclusion criteria identified 898 patients; 53% were transported directly to a trauma center. Falls, female gender, and age greater than 65 years were associated with transport to non-trauma centers. Differential distances greater than 1 mile were associated with a decreased likelihood of triage to a trauma center. CONCLUSION: Differential distance between the closest non-trauma center and the closest trauma center was associated with lower compliance with triage protocols, even in an urban setting where trauma centers can be accessed within approximately 30 minutes. Our findings suggest that there are opportunities for reducing the gap between ideal and actual application of field trauma triage guidelines through a process of education and feedback.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.303 · 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