How do early perioperative changes in AIS grade correlate with long-term neurological recovery? A retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context/Objective: Providing accurate counseling on neurological recovery is crucial after traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI). The early neurological changes that occur in the subacute phase of the injury (i.e. within 14 days of early decompressive surgery) have never been documented. The objective of this study was to assess peri-operative neurological improvements after acute TSCI and determine their relationship with long-term neurological outcomes, measured 6–12 months following the injury.Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 142 adult TSCI patients was conducted. Early peri-operative improvement was defined as improvement of at least 1 AIS grade between the pre-operative and follow-up (6–12 months post-TSCI) assessment. neurological improvement of at least 1 AIS grade.Results: Out of the 142 patients, 18 achieved a peri-operative improvement of at least 1 AIS grade. Presenting a pre-operative AIS grade B and having shorter surgical delays were the main factors associated with stronger odds of achieving this outcome. Out of the 140 patients who still had potential for improvement at the time of the post-operative assessment, 44 achieved late neurological recovery (improvement of at least 1 AIS grade between the post-operative assessment and follow-up). Patients who presented a perioperative improvement seemed more likely to achieve later neurological improvement as well, although this was not statistically significant.Conclusion: Our results suggest that it is important to assess early perioperative neurological changes within 14 days of surgery because it can provide beneficial insight on long-term neurological outcomes for some patients. In addition, earlier surgery may promote early neurological recovery.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".