MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257558597 · doi:10.1089/sur.2015.012

Surgery for Conditions of Infectious Etiology in Resource-Limited Countries Affected by Crisis: The Médecins Sans Frontières Operations Centre Brussels Experience

2015· article· en· W2257558597 on OpenAlexaff
Davina Sharma, Kate Hayman, Barclay T. Stewart, Lynette Dominguez, Miguel Trelles, Sanaulhaq Saqeb, Cheride Kasonga, Theophile Kubuya Hangi, Jerome Mupenda, Aamer Naseer, Evan G. Wong, Adam L. Kushner

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Infections · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFogarty International Center
KeywordsMedicineSpecialtyOrthopedic surgeryHealth careEpidemiologyHealthcare systemDeveloping countryMedical emergencySurgeryFamily medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Surgery for infection represents a substantial, although undefined, disease burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Médecins Sans Frontières-Operations Centre Brussels (MSF-OCB) provides surgical care in LMICs and collects data useful for describing operative epidemiology of surgical need otherwise unmet by national health services. This study aimed to describe the experience of MSF-OCB operations for infections in LMICs. By doing so, the results might aid effective resource allocation and preparation of future humanitarian staff. METHODS: Procedures performed in operating rooms at facilities run by MSF-OCB from July 2008 through June 2014 were reviewed. Projects providing specialty care only were excluded. Procedures for infection were described and related to demographics and reason for humanitarian response. RESULTS: A total of 96,239 operations were performed at 27 MSF-OCB sites in 15 countries between 2008 and 2014. Of the 61,177 general operations, 7,762 (13%) were for infections. Operations for skin and soft tissue infections were the most common (64%), followed by intra-abdominal (26%), orthopedic (6%), and tropical infections (3%). The proportion of operations for skin and soft tissue infections was highest during natural disaster missions (p<0.001), intra-abdominal infections during hospital support missions (p<0.001) and orthopedic infections during conflict missions (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Surgical infections are common causes for operation in LMICs, particularly during crisis. This study found that infections require greater than expected surgical input given frequent need for serial operations to overcome contextual challenges and those associated with limited resources in other areas (e.g., ward care). Furthermore, these results demonstrate that the pattern of operations for infections is related to nature of the crisis. Incorporating training into humanitarian preparation (e.g., surgical sepsis care, ultrasound-guided drainage procedures) and ensuring adequate resources for the care of surgical infections are necessary components for providing essential surgical care during crisis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurgical InfectionsSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207