MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256263413 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v3n1171

An Accounting of Pathology Found on Head Computed Tomography of Road Traffic Accident (Rta) Patients in Douala, Cameroon

2011· article· en· W4256263413 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Uduma Felix Uduma, Motah Mathieu

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutopsy Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Computed tomographyHead injuryRoad trafficPediatricsRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: RTA is a serious concern to many developing countries with its untoward effects on the economy.In many African countries, this is due to recent invasion into transport system by motor cyclists.Objectives: To evaluate head computed tomograms (CT) of RTA patients in Douala in order to account forpathologies.Setting: Polyclinic Bonanjo, Douala, Cameroon is a tertiary care hospital.Methodology: A prospective study of non-contrast head CT of RTA patients from April to November 2009 wasdone.Results were evaluated with SSPS statistical version.Results: A total of 94 Patients were studied constituting 20.84% of total number of CTs done for whateverreason. Males were more affected than females, 62(65.96%) and 32(34.04%) respectively The highest incidenceof 22 cases (23.04%) was found in 50-59 age range with no gender difference. The next in incidence was 30-39age range but unlike the former, a male to female ratio of 5:1 was observed. Highest percentage of cases(26.59%) had normal brain CT scans. This could be false positive results since CT has a reduced sensitivity indetecting diffuse axonal injury and brain concussion. The commonest observed pathology (19.14%) was brainoedema.Conclusion: RTA in Douala, Cameroon using the percentage of brain computed tomograms as an index iscommon and needs government’s action.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.328 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicAutopsy Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207