Concussions in Facial Trauma Patients: A Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is a paucity of literature regarding the incidence of concussions in facial trauma. Prompt identification of concussion is crucial for patient recovery. The purpose of this retrospective study is to evaluate the relationship between facial trauma and concussion symptoms. Methods: We evaluated 74 patients who presented to a facial trauma clinic at a Level 1 trauma center in British Columbia (2019-2021). Patients with facial trauma were evaluated according to injury type, epidemiological, and demographic characteristics in the context of symptoms indicating clinically significant concussions. Results: 95% of patients presenting to a facial trauma clinic at a Level 1 trauma center had a clinically significant concussion symptom that affects quality of life. This was stratified according to mild/moderate/severe concussions. Zygoma/zygomatic arch fractures had the highest mean concussion scores. Surgery cases with general anesthesia had worse mean concussion scores than no surgery or intervention under local anesthesia cases. Male patients were on average younger than female patients. Male patients had on average worse symptoms than female patients. The worst concussion score was for the 20 to 30 age range. Of any symptom, knowing the “irritable” symptom score was the biggest predictor of concussion score, followed by “anxiousness.” The more subjective symptoms appear to be more powerful predictors of concussion scores. Conclusions: The severity of concussion scores increased significantly with fractures, particularly with zygoma/zygomatic arch fractures in facial trauma patients. Facial trauma is related to clinically significant concussion symptoms that affect quality of life.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".