MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TRAUMATIC LOADING OF THE BRYAN CERVICAL DISC PROSTHESIS

2007· article· en· W1963553403 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperative Neurosurgery · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmMedicineProsthesisCervical spineArthroplastySurgeryCervical vertebraeCadaverOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The Bryan disc prosthesis (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN) relies on a precise fit between the device and the vertebral endplates to provide immediate stability after cervical arthroplasty. The safety of the cervical arthroplasty in the setting of trauma is unknown. We compare the segmental strength of the normal cervical spine and the cervical spine after single-level arthroplasty. METHODS: Fifteen cadaveric cervical spines with arthroplasty placed at the C5-C6 level were compared with 16 intact cadaveric controls. A pure moment was applied to induce flexion, extension, or axial rotation until the segment failed. RESULTS: The prosthesis provided 63, 45, and 69% of the strength of a normal spine during flexion, extension, and rotation, respectively. There were no cases of prosthesis expulsion. CONCLUSION: After insertion of the Bryan disc, the remaining ligamentous tissues provide adequate acute stability to the spine.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it