MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1507234595

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) detected in a chiropractic office: a case report.

2009· article· en· W1507234595 on OpenAlexaff
Peter C. Emary

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsParks Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecologySlipped capital femoral epiphysisHumanitiesSurgeryPhilosophyFemoral head
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report on a case of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE), which is a somewhat rare condition but one that can present in a chiropractic clinic, particularly one with a musculoskeletal scope of practice. CASE: This is a single case report of a 16-year-old adolescent male patient who presented with an 18-month history of hip pain. Radiographs originally ordered by the patient's family physician were read by the medical radiologist as "unremarkable." The family physician diagnosed the patient with tendonitis. TREATMENT: After reviewing the radiographs and examining the patient, the chiropractor suspected a SCFE that was confirmed with a repeat radiographic examination. The patient was referred back to his family physician with a diagnosis of SCFE and recommendation for orthopedic surgical consultation. The patient was subsequently treated successfully with surgical reduction by in situ pinning. CONCLUSION: The prognosis for the SCFE patient when diagnosed early and managed appropriately is good. The consequences of a delay in the diagnosis of SCFE are an increased risk of further slippage and deformity, increased complications such as avascular necrosis and chondrolysis and increased likelihood of degenerative osteoarthritis of the involved hip later in life. The diagnosis and appropriate management of SCFE is where the chiropractor has an important role to play in the management of this condition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicHip disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→