MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193408387 · doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2021.08.003

Development of a machine learning algorithm for predicting in-hospital and 1-year mortality after traumatic spinal cord injury

2021· article· en· W3193408387 on OpenAlex
Nader Fallah, Vanessa K. Noonan, Zeina Waheed, Carly S. Rivers, Tova Plashkes, Manekta Bedi, Mahyar Etminan, Nancy P. Thorogood, Tamir Ailon, Elaine Chan, Nicolas Dea, Charles G. Fisher, Raphaële Charest-Morin, Scott Paquette, SoEyun Park, John Street, Brian K. Kwon, Marcel F. Dvorak

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Spine Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaPraxis Spinal Cord InstituteUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReceiver operating characteristicCohortInjury Severity ScoreRetrospective cohort studyCohort studySpinal cord injuryAbbreviated Injury ScaleEmergency medicineInternal medicinePoison controlInjury preventionSpinal cord

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Current prognostic tools such as the Injury Severity Score (ISS) that predict mortality following trauma do not adequately consider the unique characteristics of traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI). PURPOSE: Our aim was to develop and validate a prognostic tool that can predict mortality following tSCI. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Data was collected from 1245 persons with acute tSCI who were enrolled in the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry between 2004 and 2016. OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital and 1-year mortality following tSCI. METHODS: Machine learning techniques were used on patient-level data (n=849) to develop the Spinal Cord Injury Risk Score (SCIRS) that can predict mortality based on age, neurological level and completeness of injury, AOSpine classification of spinal column injury morphology, and Abbreviated Injury Scale scores. Validation of the SCIRS was performed by testing its accuracy in an independent validation cohort (n=396) and comparing its performance to the ISS, a measure which is used to predict mortality following general trauma. RESULTS: For 1-year mortality prediction, the values for the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) for the development cohort were 0.84 (standard deviation=0.029) for the SCIRS and 0.55 (0.041) for the ISS. For the validation cohort, AUC values were 0.86 (0.051) for the SCIRS and 0.71 (0.074) for the ISS. For in-hospital mortality, AUC values for the development cohort were 0.87 (0.028) and 0.60 (0.050) for the SCIRS and ISS, respectively. For the validation cohort, AUC values were 0.85 (0.054) for the SCIRS and 0.70 (0.079) for the ISS. CONCLUSIONS: The SCIRS can predict in-hospital and 1-year mortality following tSCI more accurately than the ISS. The SCIRS can be used in research to reduce bias in estimating parameters and can help adjust for coefficients during model development. Further validation using larger sample sizes and independent datasets is needed to assess its reliability and to evaluate using it as an assessment tool to guide clinical decision-making and discussions with patients and families.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.338 · 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