MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W170708853

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an analysis of treatment outcome according to physeal stability.

2004· article· en· W170708853 on OpenAlexaffabout
Salah Fallath, Merv Letts

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSlipped capital femoral epiphysisExacerbationSlip (aerodynamics)SurgeryRetrospective cohort studyEpiphysisFemoral headInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a common hip disorder in adolescents. Treatment can be associated with serious complications, mainly avascular necrosis (AVN). The objective of this study was to evaluate treatment outcomes and complications based on physeal stability at presentation. METHODS: We reviewed retrospectively all children treated for SCFE from 1990 through 2000 at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa. RESULTS: Of a total of 87 patients (56 male) identified, 73 had slips classed as stable and 14, unstable; 42 involved the left side, 34 the right, and 19 were bilateral. Avascular necrosis (AVN) developed in 1 patient with a stable slip (morbidity 1.4%) and in 3 with unstable slips (21.4%; p = 0.001). Manipulative anatomical reduction was done in 11 cases (78.5%), all unstable slips. All slips complicated by AVN had been classified according to the traditional system as acute-on-chronic. Complication rates differed significantly between unstable slips (36%) and stable (20%). No statistically significant association was found between AVN and slip severity, time to fixation or use of reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of stable slips exhibits a lower incidence of AVN. These results nevertheless suggest that gentle reduction of unstable slips is safe and unaccompanied by an increase in complications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207