MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416145160 · doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000003850

The Economics of Surgical Decision-Making in Geriatric Type II Odontoid Fractures: Reframing the Role of Frailty

2025· article· en· W4416145160 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher S. Lozano, Vishwathsen Karthikeyan, Husain Shakil, Karlo M. Pedro, François Mathieu, Jetan H. Badhiwala, Howard J. Ginsberg, Christopher D. Witiw, Gregory D. Schroeder, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Michael Fehlings

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreCARE CanadaUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMuscular Dystrophy CanadaPublic Health OntarioSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingGeriatricsMEDLINEFrailty Index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Type II odontoid fractures are among the most common cervical fractures in older adults and are increasing in incidence, yet management remains controversial. Operative fixation may offer earlier reduction in pain and disability but is associated with higher costs and greater morbidity in older and frail patients. We sought to perform a cost-utility analysis of operative vs nonoperative care of type II odontoid fractures in older adults, assessing the impact of age and frailty. METHODS: A lifetime, time-homogeneous Markov model compared operative and nonoperative strategies in patients 65 years or older. Costs (2022 USD) were derived from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2016-2022) and health utilities from Short Form-6 dimension scores in the AO Spine North America geriatric odontoid fracture cohort to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Transition probabilities were obtained from a systematic review. Analyses were performed from a healthcare payer perspective to calculate the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). We applied a $100 000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold to determine cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses assessed robustness. Frailty effects on costs and utilities were modeled with regressions adjusting for the modified frailty index-5 (mFI-5) and incorporated into the model. RESULTS: In the base case of an 81-year-old patient, nonoperative care yielded 4.09 QALYs at $15 840 vs 4.28 QALYs at $40 246 for surgery (ICUR $131 324/QALY). One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that operative management was cost-effective below ∼77 years. Incorporating frailty-adjusted costs and utilities shifted this threshold downward to ∼76 years for mFI-5 = 0 and ∼69 for mFI-5 = 5. Probabilistic microsimulations incorporating parameter uncertainty demonstrated robustness of findings in which ICURs rose with both age and frailty. CONCLUSION: In this contemporary cost-utility analysis, both age and frailty were key determinants of surgical value. Increasing frailty lowered the age threshold for cost-effective surgery. Incorporating frailty assessment may improve value-conscious surgical decision-making in geriatric odontoid fractures.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207