MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403728242 · doi:10.7759/cureus.72308

Base Deficit, International Normalized Ratio, and Glasgow Coma Scale (BIG) is a Predictor Tool for Survival and Mortality of Pediatric Trauma Patients

2024· article· en· W4403728242 on OpenAlexaff
Liqaa Raffee, Abdel‐Hameed Al‐Mistarehi, Khaled Alawneh, Khaled J. Zaitoun, Shereen Hamadneh, Sohaib Zoghoul, Murad Alahmad, A. Alnsour, Joe Nemeth

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlasgow Coma ScaleScale (ratio)Emergency medicineSurgeryCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: An accurate estimate of the survival and mortality at the initial trauma evaluation is essential to ensure appropriate triage and stratification of the patients for progressive care. One of the recognized tools for predicting mortality is the BIG Score, composed of admission base deficit, international normalized ratio (INR), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). This study evaluates the BIG scale in predicting survival and mortality rates among pediatric trauma patients. Methods: Pediatric trauma patients, aged <18 years, visiting the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in the North of Jordan from 2014 to 2019 were included. Demographic data, trauma details, and lab results were collected. The BIG score for each patient was calculated. A receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was generated to determine the best suitable BIG cutoff point and its probabilities. Results: A total of 424 patients were included in this study. About two-thirds of the patients were males (n=298). The mean±SD of pH and GCS values were significantly lower among dead patients (6.0±2.5, 3.7±3.9, respectively) in comparison to alive ones (7.3±2.7, 11.5±5.5, respectively) (p=0.026, p<0.001, respectively). On the other hand, base deficit and INR values were significantly higher among dead patients (6.5±6.2, 1.9±2.5, respectively) than alive ones (1.9±3.6, 0.8±0.5, respectively), (p<0.001). The BIG score with a cutoff point of ≥10.0 has a high sensitivity (88.5%) and specificity (76.3%) for mortality prediction. The survival rate was correctly predicted in 100% of patients with a BIG score between 2.1 and 6. Also, the best survival predictions were seen in intubated patients (100%), followed by RTA-related trauma and ICU admission with decreasing frequency. Conclusions: The current study has shown the added value of the BIG score as a simple and rapid tool to predict prognosis in pediatric trauma settings. The BIG score with a cutoff point of ≥10.0 is highly efficient in predicting pediatric trauma patients' mortality rates. However, the BIG score demonstrates greater accuracy in predicting survival outcomes compared to its ability to predict mortality among pediatric 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207