MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955635363 · doi:10.1177/1460408617698512

64-Slice CT compared to MRI to clear cervical spine injury in high-risk GCS < 14 blunt trauma patients admitted to the ICU

2017· article· en· W2955635363 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica McCallum, Patrick D. McLaughlin, Morad Hameed, Hussein D. Kanji

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsMedicineBlunt traumaTrauma centerInjury Severity ScoreBluntIntensive care unitCervical spine injuryRadiologyPediatric traumaSurgeryCervical spineRetrospective cohort studyPoison controlInjury preventionInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Clearance of cervical spine injury including ligamentous injury is of paramount importance as results of missed injury may have serious consequences. In obtunded patients, cervical spine clearance is challenging. This study sought to determine whether a negative 64-slice CT scan alone is sufficient to clear cervical spine injury. Patients and methods All consecutive blunt trauma patients admitted to a regional (level 1) trauma center from 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2012 were screened for inclusion in this study. High-risk, GCS < 14, blunt trauma patients were included if they were admitted to the intensive care unit, had a negative 64-slice CT, and MRI of diagnostic quality. GCS was measured at the time of CT scan. Patients with a positive finding on CT scan were excluded. All images were re-interpreted by a trauma radiologist blinded to clinical outcome. Details of missed injuries and clinical impact were reported. The primary outcome was missed clinically significant injury, defined as any injury requiring an additional intervention including continued immobilization or surgery. Results There were 5891 blunt trauma patients admitted to the ICU, 44 of whom met inclusion criteria. Patients had a median injury severity score of 35 and MRI three (2–9) days after CT. Eight of 44 (18%) patients had a positive finding on MRI and five of the findings were clinically insignificant. Three patients (7%) with focal neurologic findings on clinical exam had missed injuries requiring immobilization with a collar. Two of these patients had spine disease, which may have increased their injury risk. Conclusions In high-risk obtunded blunt trauma patients admitted to the ICU, a negative 64-slice CT scan alone is insufficient to clear clinically significant cervical spine injury, with a missed clinically significant injury rate of 7%. When considered with symmetric motor function, a negative 64-slice CT scan may be sufficient. A prospective study is required to confirm these findings.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraumaSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207