MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474911080 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v9n2p246

In-Hospital Outcome Based on the Mode of EMS Transportation in a High-Income Rapidly Developing Middle Eastern Country

2016· article· en· W2474911080 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hassan Al‐Thani, Ayman El‐Menyar, Yugan Pillay, Monira Mollazehi, Ahammed Mekkodathil, Rafael Consunji

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency medical servicesEmergency medicineIntubationTrauma centerInjury Severity ScoreRetrospective cohort studyPoison controlInjury preventionMedical emergencySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) are considered as a standard component of advanced pre-hospital emergency care system. We assessed the clinical presentation and outcomes of trauma patients transported by HEMS versus ground emergency medical services (GEMS). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected trauma registry data at a level I trauma center was conducted for patients transported by GEMS and HEMS between 2011 and 2013. Patients’ data were categorized and analyzed based on the mode of transportation (MOT). RESULTS: A total of 4596 trauma patients were admitted to the hospital with a mean age of 31±15 years. Injured patients were transported to the trauma centre by GEMS (93.3%) and HEMS (6.7%). The common mechanisms of injury were motor vehicle crash (37%) and fall (25%). MVC victims were transported to the hospital by HEMS, whereas, patients with fall and pedestrian injuries (P=0.001 for all) were more likely to be transported by GEMS. Moreover, patients in the HEMS group had a higher frequency of head (p=0.001) and chest (p=0.001) injuries and required prolonged ICU and overall hospital stay (p=0.001). When compared with GEMS, HEMS group were more likely to sustain severe injuries (ISS>15; p=0.001) and needed frequent on-scene intubation (P=0.001). Hospital mortality was grater in HEMS patients (10% vs 4%, p=0.001) in comparison to GEMS. Multivariate analysis, after adjusting for the confounding factors demonstrated that polytrauma and lower scene GCS were the independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Patients transported by HEMS are characterized by greater injury severity, traumatic brain injury and on-scene intubation. Moreover, the mortality is 2.5 fold greater in patients transported by GEMS, however, the impact of MOT on mortality disappear after adjusting for potential confounders. Institutional guidelines that focus on clinical triage criteria, key environmental factors and reducing transport time may be informed by this study. Further investigations are needed to better quantifyestimate the pre-hospital time intervals and to identify the sub-groups of trauma patients who will clearly benefit from the use of HEMS.

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)0.002
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207