Existe asociación entre los hallazgos clínicos y radiológicos en el paciente con Traumatismo craneoencefálico (TCE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJETIVO Nuestro objetivo en este trabajo es evaluar, si existe o no asociacion significativa entre los factores de riesgo/factores moduladores implementados en la peticion electronica y los hallazgos patologicos encontrados en el TC craneal en pacientes que acudieron a urgencias con TCE. MATERIAL Y METODO ❑ Hemos implantado en nuestro sistema de historia clinica electronica (HCE) un algoritmo para la solicitud de TC craneal en pacientes con TCE, con el objeto de adecuar estas peticiones.❑ Los items incluidos para dicha solicitud se han basado en la revision de guias de practica clinica y evidencias de mayor nivel de la piramide deHaynes, destacando las siguientes: ▪ Canadian Head CT Rule (CHCR 2000), ▪ New Orleans Rule (NOR 2001) ▪ American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) ▪ Reglas NICE
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".