MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283822992 · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000005453

Variability of Pediatric Cervical Spine Clearance Protocols

2022· review· en· W4283822992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allison S. Letica‐Kriegel, Amy Kaplan, Claudia P. Orlas, Peter T. Masiakos

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical spineSPINE (molecular biology)MEDLINESurgeryBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to better understand the variability that exists in the contemporary pediatric cervical spine (c-spine) clearance protocols and how this variability affects clinical practice and outcomes. BACKGROUND DATA: Pediatric c-spine injury is a rare but potentially devastating event. In the adult population, validated tools, such as the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) criteria and the Canadian C-spine Rule, are available to aid in safely clearing the c-spine clinically while reducing the utilization of radiography. In the pediatric population, no standardized, validated tool exists, leading to variability in protocols that are put to use. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in Cochrane, Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Web of Science electronic databases from January 1, 2009 until April 30, 2021. Data were extracted from studies that met inclusion criteria. Quality of the included studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. RESULTS: There were 19 studies included in this systematic review. From these 19 studies, there were 16 unique protocols, 12 of which (75%) utilized some or all NEXUS criteria. Of the protocols that provided a detailed imaging algorithm (N=14), 12 (85.7%) utilized x-rays as the initial imaging modality. Indications for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging varied widely across the protocols. The rate of x-rays, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging utilization ranged from 16.7% to 97.8%, 5.4% to 100%, and 0% to 100%, respectively. Ten studies evaluated the efficacy of protocol implementation, with 9 (90%) of these studies showing an overall reduction of imaging rates in the postprotocol period. No clinically significant missed injuries were reported in the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Details of c-spine clearance protocols differed significantly across the included studies, but many applied some or all NEXUS criteria. Overall, while variable, protocols served to safely treat pediatric patients without missing any clinically significant c-spine injuries, while reducing radiation exposure.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.456
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.028 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207