Immediate weight-bearing in suspected isolated greater trochanter fractures as delineated on MRI.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In cases of suspected isolated greater trochanteric fracture, difficulty exists in establishing a definitive diagnosis when plain film is equivocal for fracture extension. There are reports of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) being used to diagnose greater trochanter fractures, with varying treatment and follow-up, however validation of treatment based on MRI findings is lacking. To date, there is no consensus on the best way to manage isolated greater trochanteric fractures. Current treatment protocols are based on plain films. The purpose of this study is to offer a more effective means of treating patients with these fractures, and to stimulate further study of isolated greater trochanteric fractures based on MRI interpretation. METHODS: Patients from May 2001 to May 2003 with a clinical picture consistent with that of a hip fracture who had equivocal plain film evidence of an isolated greater trochanteric fracture received MRI scanning. Ten patients (five male and five female) ranging in age from 59-90 (mean age 79) showed a presumed isolated greater trochanteric fracture on MRI defined as a linear, vertical band of decreased signal (Tl-weighted) extending from the greater trochanter that did not cross the mid-line. These patients were allowed immediate weight bearing as tolerated and followed for an average of 15 months. Patients were contacted by telephone during this period and any problems were noted. Problems were defined as any limitations (pain, inability to ambulate) due to the presumed hip fracture. RESULTS: All ten patients diagnosed with an isolated greater trochanteric fracture on MRI reported no limitations during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The linear, vertical bands of decreased signal (T1-weighted) extending from the greater trochanter and not crossing the midline on MRI can be considered isolated greater trochanteric avulsions, and can be managed with immediate weight-bearing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".