Overview of Traumatic Brain Injury Patients at a Tertiary Trauma Centre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to provide a general descriptive and cognitive portrait of a population with traumatic brain injury (TBI) at the time of their acute care stay. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three hundred and forty-eight TBI patients were assessed. The following data were collected for each patient: age, level of education, duration of post-traumatic amnesia, Galveston Orientation Amnesia Test score, Glasgow Coma Scale score, results of cerebral imaging, Neurobehavioral Rating Scale score, the Functional Independence Measure cognitive score and the Glasgow Outcome Scale score. RESULTS: The clinical profile of the population revealed a mean age of 40.2 (+/-18.7) and a mean of 11.5 (+/-3.6) years of education. Most patients presented with frontal (57.6%) and temporal (40%) lesions. Sixty-two percent had post-traumatic amnesia of less than 24 hours. Seventy percent presented with mild TBI, 14% with moderate and 15% with severe TBI. The cognitive deficits most frequently observed on the Neurobehavioral Rating Scale were in the areas of attention, memory and mental flexibility as well as slowness and mental fatigability. Most patients had good cognitive outcome on the Functional Independence Measure and scores of 2 and 3 were frequent on the GOS. Forty-five percent of the patients returned home after discharge, 51.7% were referred to in or out patient rehabilitation and 3.2% were transferred to long-term care facilities. CONCLUSION: Because of the specialized mandate of acute care institutions, the information provided here concerning characteristics of our TBI population is essential for more efficient decision-making and planning/programming with regards to care and service delivery.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".