Patterns and management outcome of paediatrics burn in a general surgical department: experience from a secondary referral hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burns are considered the fourth most common type of traumatic injury worldwide with significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to disclose the incidence, etiological factors, treatment and outcome of paediatric burns in Sudan. This is a retrospective hospital-based study, conducted during 2016-2019. Patients who presented with burn injuries and managed in the hospital were included in the study. Flowchart sheets were used to collect the data. Then, it was entered and analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 21 statistical software (IBM Corporation, Chicago, IL). The total number of patients who fulfill our criteria is 85 with a median age of 4 years (7 months-15 years). Sixty-five percent of them were under 5 years with male predominance (55%). Most patients' burns occurred at home. The median percentage of burn is 18% (2%-90%) which is caused by scalding burn among 55.3% followed by the flame burn in 41.2% of patients. Regarding fluid management, 60% received fluid. Open dressing for burn wounds was done for 75% and close dressing among 15% of patients. More than 80% of the patients in this study were treated and discharged in a good condition while the mortality was 5.9%. This study showed the significant burden of paediatric burns management on general surgery units in a referral hospital. Therefore, equipping the hospital and founding these specialities will decrease this load and will improve the outcome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".