Impact of Point-of-Care Ultrasound on Secondary Triage: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In mass casualty scenarios, patients with apparent hemodynamic and respiratory stability might have occult life-threatening injuries. These patients could benefit from more accurate triage methods. This study assessed the impact of point-of-care ultrasound on the accuracy of secondary triage conducted at an advanced medical post to enhance the detection of patients who, despite their apparent clinically stable condition, could benefit from earlier evacuation to definitive care or immediate life-saving treatment. METHODS: A mass casualty simulated event consisting of a bomb blast in a remote area was conducted with 10 simulated casualties classified as YELLOW at the primary triage scene; patients were evaluated by 4 physicians at an advanced medical post. Three patients had, respectively, hemoperitoneum, pneumothorax, and hemothorax. Only 2 physicians had sonographic information. RESULTS: All 4 physicians were able to suspect hemoperitoneum as a possible critical condition to be managed first, but only physicians with additional sonographic information accurately detected pneumothorax and hemothorax, thus deciding to immediately evacuate or treat.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".