MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Global trends of hand and wrist trauma: a systematic analysis of fracture and digit amputation using the Global Burden of Disease 2017 Study

2020· article· en· W3011924705 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher S. Crowe, Benjamin B. Massenburg, Shane D. Morrison, James Chang, Jeffrey B. Friedrich, Gdiom Gebreheat, Fares Alahdab, Vahid Alipour, Jalal Arabloo, Malke Asaad, Maciej Banach, Ali Bijani, Antonio Maria Borzì, Н. И. Брико, Chris D Castle, Daniel Cho, Michael T. Chung, Ahmad Daryani, Gebre Teklemariam Demoz, Zachary V Dingels, Hoa Do, Florian Fischer, Jack T Fox, Takeshi Fukumoto, Abadi Kahsu Gebre, Berhe Gebremichael, Juanita A. Haagsma, Arvin Haj‐Mirzaian, Demelash Woldeyohannes Handiso, Simon I Hay, Chi Linh Hoang, Seyed Sina Naghibi Irvani, Jacek Jerzy Jozwiak, Rohollah Kalhor, Amir Kasaeian, Yousef Khader, Rovshan Khalilov, Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Roba Khundkar, Sezer Kısa, Adnan Kısa, Zichen Liu, Marek Majdán, Navid Manafi, Ali Manafi, Ana-Laura Manda, Tuomo J Meretoja, Ted R. Miller, Abdollah Mohammadian-Hafshejani, Reza Mohammadpourhodki, Mohammad Ali Mohseni Bandpei, Ali H. Mokdad, Mukhammad David Naimzada, Duduzile Ndwandwe, Cuong Tat Nguyen, Huong Lan Thi Nguyen, Andrew T Olagunju, Tinuke O Olagunju, Hai Quang Pham, Dimas Ria Angga Pribadi, Navid Rabiee, Kiana Ramezanzadeh, Kavitha Ranganathan, Nicholas L S Roberts, Leonardo Roever, Saeed Safari, Abdallah M Samy, Lídia Sànchez-Riera, Saeed Shahabi, Catalin-Gabriel Smarandache, Dillon O Sylte, Berhe Etsay Tesfay, Bach Xuan Tran, Irfan Ullah, Parviz Vahedi, Amir Vahedian‐Azimi, Theo Vos, Dawit Habte Woldeyes, Adam Wondmieneh, Zhi-Jiang Zhang, Spencer L James

Bibliographic record

VenueInjury Prevention · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSanofi PasteurSanofiBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsThumbAmputationMedicineHand injuryWristIncidence (geometry)Numerical digitInjury preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthPhysical therapySurgeryEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As global rates of mortality decrease, rates of non-fatal injury have increased, particularly in low Socio-demographic Index (SDI) nations. We hypothesised this global pattern of non-fatal injury would be demonstrated in regard to bony hand and wrist trauma over the 27-year study period. METHODS: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 was used to estimate prevalence, age-standardised incidence and years lived with disability for hand trauma in 195 countries from 1990 to 2017. Individual injuries included hand and wrist fractures, thumb amputations and non-thumb digit amputations. RESULTS: The global incidence of hand trauma has only modestly decreased since 1990. In 2017, the age-standardised incidence of hand and wrist fractures was 179 per 100 000 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 146 to 217), whereas the less common injuries of thumb and non-thumb digit amputation were 24 (95% UI 17 to 34) and 56 (95% UI 43 to 74) per 100 000, respectively. Rates of injury vary greatly by region, and improvements have not been equally distributed. The highest burden of hand trauma is currently reported in high SDI countries. However, low-middle and middle SDI countries have increasing rates of hand trauma by as much at 25%. CONCLUSIONS: Certain regions are noted to have high rates of hand trauma over the study period. Low-middle and middle SDI countries, however, have demonstrated increasing rates of fracture and amputation over the last 27 years. This trend is concerning as access to quality and subspecialised surgical hand care is often limiting in these resource-limited regions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations125
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInjury PreventionSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207