Radiographic Assessment of Adult Flatfoot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The accurate measurement of flatfoot on standing radiographs allows correct diagnosis of the condition and evaluation of reconstructive procedures. METHOD: The standing radiographic measurements of patients with symptomatic, adult flatfoot were compared to controls using blinded observers. RESULTS: On the lateral radiograph, the talar-to-first metatarsal angle, the calcaneal pitch angle, and the medial cuneiform-fifth metatarsal height differed significantly between the patient group and the controls. The difference in the talar-to-first metatarsal angles on lateral radiographs was the most statistically significant (patient group 21.1 +/- 10.8 degrees and control 7.1 +/- 10.7 degrees, p < 0.0001) with good correlation between readings (intraobserver 0.75, interobserver 0.83). On the anteroposterior (AP) radiograph, the talar head uncoverage distance was the most significantly different measurement between these groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the hypothesis that the talar-first metatarsal angle is an accurate radiographic identifier of patients with symptomatic, adult flatfoot.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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".