MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107453419 · doi:10.29173/cjen18

Suspension Trauma

2020· article· en· W3107453419 on OpenAlex
Richard H. Drew

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsCovenant Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmMedical emergencyOccupational safety and healthLegislationMedicineWork (physics)BusinessHealth careOperations managementForensic engineeringEngineeringPsychologyPolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fall harnesses have become much more prevalent for those that work at heights. Safety harnesses and fall arrest systems are commonly used by the construction industry, mountain climbers and other recreational activities where fall risks are a concern. Through the efforts of occupational health and safety legislation, job site safety programming and workplace harm reduction culture, there is a growing understanding of how and when to don these safety devices and the potential perils associated with their use. However, there is a paucity of information within the healthcare community in how to clinically manage a patient who has suffered a pattern of injury that can arise from these devices - known as suspension trauma. This condition may also be termed as harness-induced pathology, orthostatic shock while suspended and harness hang syndrome. This article helps to increase awareness and understanding of what suspension trauma is and how to pragmatically manage this condition from both a prehospital and emergency department perspective.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.273 · 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