HIGH TIBIAL VALGUS OSTEOTOMY AND FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This is a case series of 76 knees of 62 patients who underwent upper tibial valgus osteotomy for treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis during a 20-year period and who were followed for a mean of 7.6 years. Methods: The patients were evaluated by validated outcome assessment systems of general health status short form (SF-36), the Western Ontario McMaster osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), McMaster Toronto arthritis patient preference questionnaire (MACTAR) and also knee society clinical rating system (KSS). Two control groups—one consisting of 60 patients with similar age with osteoarthritis who had not received any surgical treatment and another 60 patients who had received knee replacement for osteoarthritis—were also studied. The results were compared among these three groups. Results/Conclusion: Tibial osteotomy caused improvement in SF-36 and WOMAC scores compared to the non-operated control group, but it did not do so when it was compared with knee arthroplasty. The mean±SD KSS was 103.37±12.19 with a failure rate (defined as candidacy for knee arthroplasty) of 28.94%. Improvement in patients’ pain level, social activity, housework activities and self-esteem was observed. Stair navigation, surface walking, getting on and off a car were not significantly better than the non-operated group
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".