MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389296227 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.230634

Derivation of the Falls Decision Rule to exclude intracranial bleeding without head CT in older adults who have fallen

2023· article· en· W4389296227 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Kerstin de Wit, Mathew Mercuri, Natasha Clayton, Éric Mercier, Judy Morris, Rebecca Jeanmonod, Debra Eagles, Catherine Varner, David Barbic, Ian M. Buchanan, Mariyam Ali, Yoan K. Kagoma, Ashkan Shoamanesh, Paul T. Engels, Sunjay Sharma, Andrew Worster, Shelley McLeod, Marcel Émond, Ian G. Stiell, Αλεξάνδρα Παπαϊωάννου, Sameer Parpia

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité de MontréalUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoSchwartz/Reisman Emergency Medicine InstituteUniversity of OttawaMcMaster University Medical CentreOttawa HospitalQueen's UniversityPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentGlasgow Coma ScaleConfidence intervalLogistic regressionClinical prediction ruleCohortProspective cohort studyHead injuryPediatricsFear of fallingHead traumaPoison controlEmergency medicineInternal medicineSurgeryInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ground-level falls are common among older adults and are the most frequent cause of traumatic intracranial bleeding. The aim of this study was to derive a clinical decision rule that safely excludes clinically important intracranial bleeding in older adults who present to the emergency department after a fall, without the need for a computed tomography (CT) scan of the head. METHODS: This prospective cohort study in 11 emergency departments in Canada and the United States enrolled patients aged 65 years or older who presented after falling from standing on level ground, off a chair or toilet seat, or out of bed. We collected data on 17 potential predictor variables. The primary outcome was the diagnosis of clinically important intracranial bleeding within 42 days of the index emergency department visit. An independent adjudication committee, blinded to baseline data, determined the primary outcome. We derived a clinical decision rule using logistic regression. RESULTS: The cohort included 4308 participants, with a median age of 83 years; 2770 (64%) were female, 1119 (26%) took anticoagulant medication and 1567 (36%) took antiplatelet medication. Of the participants, 139 (3.2%) received a diagnosis of clinically important intracranial bleeding. We developed a decision rule indicating that no head CT is required if there is no history of head injury on falling; no amnesia of the fall; no new abnormality on neurologic examination; and the Clinical Frailty Scale score is less than 5. Rule sensitivity was 98.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.9%-99.6%), specificity was 20.3% (95% CI 19.1%-21.5%) and negative predictive value was 99.8% (95% CI 99.2%-99.9%). INTERPRETATION: ClinicalTrials. gov, no. NCT03745755.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association Journal→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→