The Incidence of Achilles Tendon Ruptures in Edmonton, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures specific to the North American population has not been previously reported and current epidemiological data are primarily reported from European communities. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures in the city of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and to compare this data to those reported in European studies. METHODS: A retrospective chart review from all five acute care hospitals in Edmonton from 1998 to 2002 (inclusive) were reviewed for Achilles tendon ruptures. Data such as gender, age, side, mechanism of injury, and season of injury were obtained. RESULTS: The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures ranged from an annual average of 5.5 ruptures to 9.9 ruptures per 100,000 inhabitants with an overall mean of 8.3 ruptures per 100,000 people. There was a statistically significant difference in Achilles tendon ruptures over the last two study years for both genders (women, p < 0.02; men, p < 0.03). The mean age for an Achilles tendon rupture was 40.6 years for men and 44.5 years for women. The Achilles tendon ruptures occurred most frequently in the 30 to 39 and 40 to 49 year old age groups in both men and women, respectively (p < 0.02). Most ruptures occurred in the spring season, but there was no statistical difference in the incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures by season (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures in this community was comparable to those reported in European communities (range 6 to 37 ruptures per 100,000 people), although a bimodal age distribution of rupture previously reported was not observed in this study.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".