Stable rates of operative treatment of distal radius fractures in Ontario, Canada: a population-based retrospective cohort study (2004–2013)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Rates of surgical management of distal radius fractures are increasing internationally despite the higher cost and limited outcome evidence to support this shift. This study examines the epidemiology of distal radius fractures and asks if the same shift has occurred in Ontario, Canada (population 13.9 million). Methods: This population-based, retrospective cohort study examined distal radius fractures in people aged 18 years and older over a 10-year period (2004–2013). The incidence analyses were based on the first occurrence of a fracture within a 2-year time period. The number of fractures, age-adjusted incidence rates and frequency of fracture treatment type by year were assessed. We used a Poisson regression with robust standard errors to determine if there was a statistically significant change in the frequency of fracture treatment type over time. Results: There were 25 355 distal radius fractures among Ontarians 18 years of age and older in 2013. Between 2004 and 2013, the age-adjusted incidence rate for people 35 years of age and older was stable, between 2.32 and 2.70 per 1000 population. Rates of cast immobilization remained stable between 82% and 84%. Of those patients treated surgically, the rate of open reduction and internal fixation rose from 7% in 2004 to 13% in 2013 at the expense of other types of surgical management. Conclusion: In Ontario, rates of cast immobilization are stable and there has been a movement toward open reduction and internal fixation among patients treated surgically.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".