MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970420818 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/irz146

A Scoping Review on the Long-Term Outcomes in Persons with Adult-Acquired Burn Injuries

2019· review· en· W2970420818 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie R. Cimino, Jorge Rios, Matthew Godleski, Sander L. Hitzig

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialPsycINFOMEDLINEBurn injuryQuality of life (healthcare)AccidentalStressorInjury preventionCoping (psychology)GerontologyPoison controlPsychiatryMedical emergencySurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adult-acquired burn injuries are a life-altering event that can lead to debilitating functional or psychological impairments. With advancements in health care resulting in decreased mortality rates, survivors of burn injuries can expect to live longer. This warrants a shift in focus to better understand what happens to adults once they are discharged from the hospital into the community. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review was to map the literature regarding the long-term outcomes of community-dwelling adult-acquired burn survivors. A computer-assisted literature search was conducted on literature from January 1, 2000 to August 31, 2018 utilizing four large databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and PsycINFO). Articles were included if they had a minimum of five individuals with a burn injury as a result of an accidental injury who were at least 18 years of age at the time of injury. Fifty-four articles were found suitable for inclusion in this review. The majority of studies were conducted in the United States and were longitudinal in design. Four themes were apparent from the articles: postburn complications, psychosocial outcomes, quality of life, and community participation. Data are lacking with respect to outcomes more than 5 years postburn as well as qualitative research. Furthermore, more literature is needed to understand the impact of postburn complications, coping strategies, and posttraumatic growth as well as barriers to community participation. Overall, there is an emerging body of literature that describes the long-term outcomes of adult-acquired burn survivors up to 5 years postburn.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207