Investigation of the role of calcaneal dimensions in pes cavus and pes planus (920.4)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Disruption in the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) of the foot can lead to pes cavus (high arched foot) or pes planus (low arched foot). The importance of the calcaneus in MLA structure can be inferred in the treatment of severe pes planus, where alteration of calcaneal length is performed if conservative treatments have failed. Purpose: To our knowledge, no previous study has investigated whether variations in calcaneal size can be correlated to MLA height. The purpose of this study was to compare calcaneal dimensions between pes cavus, normal MLA, and pes planus groups. Methods: Utilizing OsiriX software, several dimensions of 3D calcanei were compared between pes cavus, normal MLA, and pes planus subjects. Results: The pes cavus, normal MLA, and pes planus groups did not show any significant differences between group means for all calculated dimensions. Although not statistically significant, calcaneal length (p=0.140), talar articular surface width (p=0.228), and calcaneal tuberosity height (p=0.087) exhibited increasing size with increasing MLA height. This study should be repeated with a larger population to further verify this trend. Conclusion: There is no significant difference in these specific calcaneal dimensions between pes cavus, normal MLA, and pes planus groups. This study provides evidence that calcaneal lengthening procedures may be altering a normally sized calcaneus.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".