MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975731837 · doi:10.1177/2292550319876659

Pediatric Hand Fracture Referring Practices: A Scoping Review

2019· review· en· W2975731837 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralOrthopedic surgerySurgeryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pediatric hand fractures are common, but few require surgery; therefore, these fractures are often perceived to be overreferred. Our objective is to systematically identify and describe pediatric hand fracture referring practices. METHOD: A scoping review was performed, searching electronic databases and grey literature up to January 2018 to identify referring practices for children (17 years and younger) with hand fractures (defined as radiographically confirmed fractures distal to the carpus) to hand surgeons. All study designs were included, and study selection and data extraction were independently performed in duplicate by 2 reviewers. Outcomes included referring rates, necessity of referral, referring criteria, and management of fractures. RESULTS: Twenty (10 cross-sectional, 7 prospective cohorts, and 3 narrative reviews) studies reporting on referring practices or management of 21,624 pediatric hand fractures were included. Proportion of pediatric hand fractures referred to hand surgeons ranged from 6.5% to 100%. Unnecessary referral, defined as those fractures within the scope of primary care management, ranged from 27% to 78.1%. Ten studies reported referring criteria, with 14 unique criteria identified. The most common referring criteria were displacement (36.4%), loss of joint congruity (36.4%), and instability (36.4%). The most common justification for these criteria was increased likelihood of requiring surgery. The most common initial management was immobilization (66%-100%). Final management was provided by orthopedic or plastic hand surgeons with 0% to 32.9% of fractures requiring surgery. CONCLUSION: Referring practices vary widely in the literature. Major gaps in the literature include objective measures and justification for referring criteria and primary care education on hand fracture referring practices.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.256 · 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