FUNCTION PROGNOSIS FOLLOWING THORACOLUMBAR TRAUMA: A SYNTHESIS OF SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEWS AND CONSENSUS EXPERT OPINION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to determine evidence-based guidelines on functional outcomes following common thoracolumbar injuries using a synthesis of systematic literature reviews and consensus expert opinion A questionnaire was created comprising five cases representative of common thoracolumbar injuries (a thoracic compression fracture, a flexion distraction injury and burst fractures each with varied location, patient demographics and treatment strategies). For each scenario five questions about expected functional outcomes were posed. Questionnaires were distributed to the Spine Trauma Study Group. Responses were combined with available data from a systematic review of the same injuries and outcomes to create consensus evidence based guidelines. The survey was completed by 31 (57%) of 53 surgeons representing 20 centres across North America. The systematic reviews identified 49 appropriate studies. One year following a L1 burst fracture, a heavy laborer, treated with protective mobilization (cast or brace) has a 40% chance of being pain free, 70% chance of regaining pre-injury range of motion, can expect to be re-employed within 4–6 months and be able to participate in high impact exercise and contact sport with no or minimal limitation. Length of inpatient stay averages 4–5 days. One year following posterior short segment stabilization of a L1 bust fracture in a college football player, there is an expected 45% chance of being pain free and 55% chance of regaining pre-injury ROM. While an ultimate return to high impact exercise and contact sports is anticipated, 32% of experts expect the injury to end a college football career. Results for the other trauma scenarios are included. This combination of literature and expert opinion represents the best available evidence on functional prognosis after thoracolumbar trauma. By providing consistent, accurate information surgeons and other care path providers will help patients develop realistic expectations, which may shape and improve their ultimate outcome.
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 | 0.086 | 0.259 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.033 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".