Epidemiology and outcomes for level 1 and 2 traumas during the first wave of COVID19 in a Canadian centre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine if lockdown measures imposed during the first wave of the COVID19 pandemic affected trauma patterns, volumes, and outcomes in a western Canadian level 1 trauma center, we performed a retrospective cohort study assessing level 1 and 2 trauma patients presenting to our center during the initial COVID19 "lockdown" period (March 15-June 14, 2020) compared to a similar cohort of patients presenting during a "control" period 1 year prior (March 15-June 14, 2019). Overall, we saw a 7.8% reduction in trauma volumes during the lockdown period, and this was associated with a shorter average ED length of stay (6.2 ± 4.7 h vs. 9.7 ± 11.8 h, p = 0.003), reduced time to computed tomography (88.5 ± 68.2 min vs. 105.1 ± 65.5 min, p < 0.001), a reduction in intensive care unit admissions (11.0 ± 4.9% vs. 20.0 ± 15.5%, p = 0.001), and higher injury severity score (6.5 ± 7.6 vs. 6.2 ± 9.5, p = 0.04). Our findings suggest that lockdown measures imposed during the first wave of the COVID19 pandemic had a significant impact on trauma patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".