Reasons for delayed spinal cord decompression in individuals with traumatic spinal cord injuries in Iran: A qualitative study from the perspective of neurosurgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The median time from the event leading to the spinal cord injury (SCI) to the time of decompressive surgery is estimated to be 6.9 days in Iran, which is much longer than the proposed ideal time (less than 24 h) in published guidelines. The current qualitative study aimed to determine the reasons for the observed decompression surgery delay in Iran from the perspective of neurosurgeons. METHODS: This qualitative study is designed to perform content analysis on the gathered data from face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 12 Iranian neurosurgeons. RESULTS: The findings of the current study suggest that patient-related factors constitute more than half of the codes extracted from the interviews. Overall, the type of injury, presence of polytrauma, and surgeons' wrong attitude are the main factors causing delayed spinal cord decompression in Iranian patients from the perspective of neurosurgeons. Other notable factors include delay in transferring patients to the trauma center, delay in availability of necessary equipment, and scarce medical personnel. CONCLUSION: In the perspective of neurosurgeons, the type of injury, presence of polytrauma, and surgeons' wrong attitude are the leading reasons for delayed decompressive surgery of individuals with SCI in Iran.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".