MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323410528 · doi:10.1055/s-2006-945536

MILD CLOSED HEAD INJURY

2006· article· en· W2323410528 on OpenAlexaff
D M Macgregor, Shay Menascu

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropediatrics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestraint-Related Deaths
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClosed head injuryHead (geology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryTraumatic brain injury

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To review the literature on mild closed head injury with a focus on definitions and pathophysiological mechanisms. Methods: A systematic review of the medical and psychological literature was completed and the results were analysed. Results: Mild closed head injury in children should be assessed from a functional perspective. An agreed upon definition is an acute blow to the head or from acceleration/deceleration injury that correlates with a Glasgow Coma Scale of 13–15 and associated with temporary loss of consciousness, vomiting, lethargy and headache (including seizures occurring immediately after the impact). Pathophysiological markers of head injury include S-100B (an acidic calcium-binding protein) and neuron specific enolase (NSE) which correlate relatively well with severe brain injury. There is a recognized association with the apolipoprotein a (APO a ) 4 allele genotype. A new simple binary classification of concussion has eliminated the need for injury grading scales. “Simple” concussion gradually resolves over a 7–10 day period. “Complex” concussion is characterized by persistent symptoms, prolonged loss of consciousness (<1 minute), convulsive or motor phenomenon or a history of multiple concussions (over time). Conclusion: Mild traumatic brain injury is a common paediatric problem. The potential for long-term disability needs recognition.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropediatricsSame topicRestraint-Related DeathsFrench-language works237,207