MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120624037 · doi:10.1148/radiol.12120732

Head CT for Nontrauma Patients in the Emergency Department: Clinical Predictors of Abnormal Findings

2012· article· en· W2120624037 on OpenAlexaff
Xi Wang, John J. You

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentConfidence intervalOdds ratioInstitutional review boardRetrospective cohort studyLogistic regressionCohortMalignancyRadiologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To identify predictors of clinically important abnormal findings in computed tomography (CT) images of the head among emergency department (ED) patients without a history of trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Approval was obtained from the institutional research ethics board, and informed consent from patients was not required. This study was a retrospective review of consecutive unenhanced head CT examinations in patients aged 18 years or older who did not have trauma or known intracranial pathologic processes in ED from January 2004 through June 2006. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of clinically important abnormal CT findings in the derivation cohort (CT examinations from January 1, 2004, through August 15, 2005), and the reproducibility of findings in a validation cohort (all subsequent CT scans through to June 30, 2006) was assessed. The strength of association of each variable was expressed with clinically important abnormal CT findings as adjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Of 29 469 consecutive head CT images performed at a single institution between January 1, 2004, and June 30, 2006, 3967 were eligible for this study. Of the CT images in these patients, 548 (13.8%) revealed clinically important abnormalities. Six independent clinical predictors of important abnormal findings on head CT were identified: age (adjusted OR per 10-year increase: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.28), focal neurologic deficit (adjusted OR: 5.39; 95% CI: 3.90, 7.47), altered mental status (adjusted OR: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.66, 3.25), history of malignancy (adjusted OR: 4.11; 95% CI: 2.28, 7.42), nausea and/or vomiting (adjusted OR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.14, 4.33), and derangements in coagulation profile (adjusted OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.07, 3.41). CONCLUSION: This study identified several potential clinical predictors of abnormal head CT findings in ED patients who did not sustain trauma. Prospective validation of a clinical prediction rule in this population is warranted.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations64
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207