Bilateral Parietal Skull Fractures in Infants Attributable to Accidental Falls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Multiple skull fractures, including bilateral parietal skull fractures (BPSFs) in infants are considered to be suspicious for abusive head trauma (AHT). The aim of this report is to describe a series of BPSF cases in infants which occurred due to accidental falls. METHODS: We searched our neuroradiology database for BPSF in infants (<1 year old) diagnosed between 2006 and 2019; we reviewed initial presentation, mechanisms of injury, clinical course, head imaging, skeletal survey X-rays, ophthalmology, social work and child abuse physicians (CAP) assessments, and long-term follow-up. "Confirmed accidental BPSF" were strictly defined as having negative skeletal survey and ophthalmology evaluation and a CAP conclusion of accidental injury. RESULTS: Twelve cases of BPSF were found; 3 were confirmed to be accidental, with a mean age at presentation of 3 months. Two infants had single-impact falls, and 1 had a compression injury; all 3 had small intracranial hemorrhages. None had bruises or other injuries, and all remained clinically well. A literature search found 10 similar cases and further biomechanical evidence that these fractures can occur from accidental falls. CONCLUSION: While AHT should be kept in the differential diagnosis whenever BPSFs are seen, these injuries can occur as a result of accidental falls.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".