Public awareness of testicular torsion is lacking in Edmonton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The time from symptom onset to intervention dictates morbidity in testicular torsion (TT). Delayed presentation negatively impacts surgical outcomes and poor knowledge about TT is hypothesized to be a potential cause of delay. Our study characterizes baseline public awareness rates among families in Edmonton and assesses the association between awareness and TT outcomes. METHODS: Patients and their caregivers completed surveys assessing TT awareness. Families were surveyed in two groups: those who presented with TT and age-matched controls. Affected families gave additional information about symptoms, time to notify parents, and present to the hospital. Outcomes were assessed at followup and through medical record review. RESULTS: Of 61 families, 18 (29.5%) patients and 22 (36.1%) parents had heard of TT. Among TT-affected patients (n=30), time to report symptoms (3.2 vs. 20.5 hours, p<0.01) and to arrive at hospital (3.0 vs. 20.8 hours, p<0.01) was significantly longer for patients requiring orchiectomy. Total time (odds ratio [OR] 0.992, p=0.01) and pain (OR 0.904, p=0.05) were associated with outcome. No differences in awareness were seen between patients who underwent orchiopexy vs. orchiectomy (23.8% vs. 25.0%, p>0.99). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that most Edmonton families have never heard of TT and that the pre-admission interval constitutes a substantial proportion of delays in surgery. Although time and pain ratings were associated with outcomes in TT, further evidence is required to demonstrate that awareness impacts outcomes significantly.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".