MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Non-operative treatment of abdominal gunshot injuries

2000· review· en· W2152601964 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

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLaparotomyGUNSHOT INJURYSurgeryMEDLINEGeneral surgeryClinical trialInjury preventionAbdominal cavityPoison controlAbdomenConservative managementMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Non-operative treatment is a management option that challenges the traditional mandatory laparotomy for abdominal gunshot injuries. METHODS: All published relevant clinical reports were retrieved by searching through the Medline database and manually. The theoretical arguments in favour of non-operative management as well as the results of the reviewed reports are analysed and evaluated. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Patients with proven non-penetration of the abdominal cavity can be offered conservative treatment with a satisfactory outcome. Greater caution should be exercised in the presence of a documented visceral injury until the safety of this option has been established by further clinical trials.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.298 · 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