<i>In vitro</i>Evaluation of the Torsional Strength Reduction of Neonate Calf Metatarsal Bones with Bicortical Defects Resulting from the Removal of External Fixation Implants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the torsional strength of calf metatarsal bones with defects produced by removal of 2 different implants. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro mechanical comparison of paired bones with bicortical defects resulting from the implantation of 2 different external fixation systems: the transfixation pin (TP) and the pin sleeve system (PS). SAMPLE POPULATION: Neonatal calf metatarsal bones (n = 6 pairs). METHODS: From each pair, 1 bone was surgically instrumented with 2 PS implants and the contralateral bone with 2 TP implants. Implants were removed immediately leaving bicortical defects at identical locations between paired metatarsi. Each bone was tested in torque until failure. The mechanical variables statistically compared were the torsional stiffness, the torque and angle at failure, and work to failure. RESULTS: For TP and PS constructs, respectively, there were no significant differences between construct types for any of the variables tested. Mean ± SD torsional stiffness: 5.50 ± 2.68 and 5.35 ± 1.79 (Nm/°), P = .75; torque: 57.42 ± 14.84 and 53.43 ± 10.16 (Nm); P = .34; angle at failure: 14.76 ± 4.33 and 15.45 ± 4.84 (°), P = .69; and work to failure 7.45 ± 3.19 and 8.89 ± 3.79 (J), P = .17). CONCLUSIONS: Bicortical defects resulting from the removal of PS and TP implants equally affect the investigated mechanical properties of neonate calf metatarsal bones.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".