Impact of Sex on Completion of Life-Saving Interventions for Severely Injured Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sex disparities in access and quality of care are well known for some time-sensitive conditions. However, the impact of sex on early trauma care remains unknown. In this study, we compared delays of completion of life-saving interventions (LSIs) between females and males among severely injured patients. This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients who consulted or were transported by ambulance in the emergency department (ED) of a level-one trauma centre following injury between September 2017 and December 2019 and for whom at least one LSI was performed. The list of LSIs was established by an expert consensus and included trauma team leader (TTL) activation, endotracheal intubation, chest decompression, blood transfusion, massive transfusion protocol, neurosurgery, spinal surgery, intestinal surgery, and spleen, liver and/or kidney angiography. A total of 905 patients were included. No significant statistical differences in the LSI delays were found when comparing females and males brought directly to the ED and transferred from another health care setting. Results of this study suggest that delays before completion of LSIs are similar for severely injured patients at our major trauma centre regardless of their sex.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".