MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1640335646

Pinning technique for shoulder fractures in adolescents: computer modelling of percutaneous pinning of proximal humeral fractures.

2009· article· en· W1640335646 on OpenAlexaff
Ramin Mehin, Afshin Mehin, David Wickham, Merv Letts

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAbbotsford Veterinary Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous pinningShouldersProximal humerusHumerusCoronal planePercutaneousOrthodonticsPopulationAnatomySurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the technique of percutaneous pinning of proximal humerus fractures, the appropriate entry site and trajectory of pins is unknown, especially in the adolescent population. We sought to determine the ideal entry site and trajectory of pins. METHODS: We used magnetic resonance images of nonfractured shoulders in conjunction with radiographs of shoulder fractures that were treated with closed reduction and pinning to construct 3-dimensional computer-generated models. We used engineering software to determine the ideal location of pins. We also conducted a literature review. RESULTS: The nonfractured adolescent shoulder has an articular surface diameter of 41.3 mm, articular surface thickness of 17.4 mm and neck shaft angle of 36 degrees. Although adolescents and adults have relatively similar shoulder skeletal anatomy, they suffer different types of fractures. In our study, 14 of 16 adolescents suffered Salter-Harris type II fractures. The ideal location for the lateral 2 pins in an anatomically reduced shoulder fracture is 4.4 cm and 8.0 cm from the proximal part of the humeral head directed at 21.2 degrees in the coronal plane relative to the humeral shaft. CONCLUSION: Operative management of proximal humerus fractures in adolescents requires knowledge distinct from that required for adult patients. This is the first study to examine the anatomy of the nonfractured proximal humerus in adolescents. This is also the first study to attempt to model the positioning of percutaneous proximal humerus pins.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicShoulder Injury and Treatment→French-language works237,207→