MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003002449 · doi:10.1177/0846537119888375

Accuracy of Preoperative MDCT in Patients With Penetrating Abdominal and Pelvic Trauma

2020· article· en· W3003002449 on OpenAlexaff
Zonia Ghumman, Sandra Monteiro, Vincent M. Mellnick, Angela Coates, Paul T. Engels, Michael N. Patlas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Association of Radiologists Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsHamilton General HospitalImpactMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLaparotomyRadiologyMultidetector computed tomographyAbdominal traumaComputed tomographyPenetrating traumaLaparoscopyGold standard (test)CohortBluntInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the overall diagnostic accuracy of preoperative multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in penetrating abdominal and pelvic injuries (PAPI). Method and Materials: We used our hospitals’ trauma registry to retrospectively identify patients with PAPI from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2016. Only patients who had a 64-MDCT scan at presentation and subsequently underwent laparotomy or laparoscopy were included in our study cohort. Each finding noted on MDCT was rated using a 5-point scale to indicate certainty of injury, with a score of 0 being definitive. Using surgical findings as the gold standard, the accuracy of radiology reports was analyzed in 2 ways. A κ statistic was calculated to evaluate each pair of values for absolute agreement, and ratings for all organ systems were analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether radiology and surgical findings were similar enough to be clinically meaningful. Qualitative review of the radiology and surgical reports focused on the gastrointestinal (GI) tract was conducted. Results: Our cohort consisted of 38 males and 4 females with a median age of 29 years and a median injury severity score of 15.6. For this study, 12 different organ groups were categorized and analyzed. Of those organ groups, absolute agreement between MDCT and surgical findings was found only for liver and spleen (κ values ranging from 0.2 to 0.5). Additionally, the ANOVA revealed an interaction between finding type and organ system ( F 1, 33 = 7.4, P < .001). The most clinically significant discrepancies between MDCT and surgical findings were for gallbladder, bowel, mesenteric, and diaphragmatic injuries. Qualitative review of the GI tract revealed that radiologists can detect significant findings such as presence of injury, however, localization and extent of injury pose a challenge. Conclusion: The detection of clinically significant injuries to solid organs in trauma patients with PAPI on 64-MDCT is adequate. However, detection of injury to the remaining organ groups on MDCT, especially bowel, mesentery, and diaphragm, remains a challenge.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Association of Radiologists JournalSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207