Morbidity and mortality following pelvic ramus fractures in an older Atlantic Canadian cohort
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pelvic ramus fractures in older patients are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of literature on fractures of the pelvis in this age group. The purpose of this study was to report mortality rates following such injuries. In addition, we aimed to describe and quantify the important resultant morbidity in this vulnerable population. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of all low-energy pelvic ramus fractures in patients more than age 60 years that occurred between January 2000 and December 2005. Data on survival, hospital length of stay, ambulatory status and place of residence were recorded. For comparison, we calculated the mortality rate for a surrogate age- and sex-matched group using Statistics Canada survival data for use as an uninjured control group. Results: We identified 43 patients (32 women [74%]; mean age 79.4 yr) with isolated low-energy pelvic ramus fractures over the study period. The 1- and 5-year mortality rates were 16.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.8%–30.3%) and 58.1% (95% CI 43.3%–71.6%), respectively, both significantly higher than the point estimates for the control group (6.6% and 31.3%, respectively). Following injury, 14/39 patients (36%) permanently required increased ambulatory aids, and 8 (20%) required a permanent increase in everyday level of care. Conclusion: The results suggest that there may be increased mortality and morbidity following low-energy pattern pelvic ramus fractures in an older population compared to age- and sex-matched uninjured control subjects.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it