MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294724494 · doi:10.1177/21925682221114800

A Practical Classification System for Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury Based on a Three-Phased Modified Delphi Process From the AOSpine Spinal Cord Injury Knowledge Forum

2022· article· en· W4294724494 on OpenAlexafffund
Laureen D. Hachem, Mary Zhu, Bizhan Aarabi, Benjamin M. Davies, Anthony M. DiGiorgio, Nathan Evaniew, Michael G. Fehlings, Mario Ganau, Daniel Graves, James D. Guest, Yoon Ha, James S. Harrop, Christopher Hofstetter, Paul Aarne Koljonen, Shekar N. Kurpad, Rex A. W. Marco, Allan R. Martin, Narihito Nagoshi, Aria Nouri, Vafa Rahimi‐Movaghar, Ricardo Rodrigues‐Pinto, Paula Valerie ter Wengel, Lindsay Tetreault, Brian K. Kwon, Jefferson R. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Spine Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoAO FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineDelphi methodSpinal cord compressionSpinal cord injurySpinal cordCordPhysical therapyDecompressionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: A modified Delphi study. OBJECTIVE: To assess current practice patterns in the management of cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) and develop a simplified, practical classification system which offers ease of use in the acute setting, incorporates modern diagnostic tools and provides utility in determining treatment strategies for cervical SCI. METHODS: A three-phase modified Delphi procedure was performed between April 2020 and December 2021. During the first phase, members of the AOSpine SCI Knowledge forum proposed variables of importance for classifying and treating cervical SCI. The second phase involved an international survey of spine surgeons gauging practices surrounding the role and timing of surgery for cervical SCI and opinions regarding factors which most influence these practices. For the third phase, information obtained from phases 1 and 2 were used to draft a new classification system. RESULTS: 396 surgeons responded to the survey. Neurological status, spinal stability and cord compression were the most important variables influencing decisions surrounding the role and timing of surgery. The majority (>50%) of respondents preferred to perform surgery within 24 hours post-SCI in clinical scenarios in which there was instability, severe cord compression or severe neurology. Situations in which <50% of respondents were inclined to operate early included: SCI with mild neurological impairments, with cord compression but without instability (with or without medical comorbidities), and SCI without cord compression or instability. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal stability, cord compression and neurological status are the most important variables influencing surgeons' practices surrounding the surgical management of cervical SCI. Based on these results, a simplified classification system for acute cervical SCI has been proposed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.120
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.106
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1200.106
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Spine JournalSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207