MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237894453 · doi:10.2310/em.4352

Thoracic Trauma

2020· article· en· W4237894453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William E. Baker, Ron Medzon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma Management and Diagnosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulmonary contusionMedicineRib cageHemothoraxBluntRadiologyFocused assessment with sonography for traumaBlunt traumaPericardial windowThorax (insect anatomy)Stab woundTamponadeSurgeryPneumothoraxAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

More than 85% of blunt and penetrating trauma to the thorax results in injury to the lungs or ribs. Among civilians, blunt trauma is the most common mechanism, while penetrating trauma is the most common among military sectors. This review describes the assessment and stabilization, diagnosis, treatment and disposition, and outcomes of thoracic trauma. Videos shows the “lung point” sign on M-mode and two-dimensional ultrasonography, and a transthoracic echocardiogram clip of pericardial clot and tamponade due to a gunshot wound. Figures show a sonogram showing the “lung point sign”, a chest x-ray and computed tomographic scan demonstrating right-sided hemothorax in a patient with a right chest stab wound, and a three-dimensional computed tomographic scan and chest x-ray of a blunt trauma patient with displaced fractures of the left lateral sixth to ninth ribs. Tables list types of injuries, NEXUS chest decision instrument imaging criteria, level 2 evidence-based recommendations for the management of pulmonary contusion and flail chest by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice guidelines for managing issues with pulmonary contusion and flail chest, and the Vancouver simplified and University of Washington grading systems for blunt aortic injury. This review contains 2 videos, 4 highly rendered figures, 10 tables, and 94 references.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTrauma Management and DiagnosisFrench-language works237,207