ANSWER: Talocalcaneal tarsal coalition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
### Anteroposterior radiograph of right ankle No abnormality is appreciable on this anteroposterior radiograph. ### Lateral radiograph of right ankle This image demonstrates a complete C-sign with osseous bridging. There is narrowing of the posterior subtalar facet, a short talar neck and a small dorsal subtalar beak. ### Sagittal fast spin echo T1, sagittal fat saturated T2 and coronal fast short tau inversion recovery magnetic resonance images The magnetic resonance images demonstrate bone marrow oedema across the middle subtalar joint, cortical irregularity and small subchondral cysts, in keeping with fibrous coalition. Tarsal coalition is an abnormal union between two or more tarsal bones. The coalition can be osseous, fibrous or cartilaginous. Tarsal coalition is relatively common on autopsy, with an incidence of up to 1% of the population; although the majority of these are thought to be asymptomatic.1 Most cases of tarsal coalition occur between the calcaneonavicular and talocalcaneal joints.2 However, coalitions between almost any two adjacent tarsal bones have been reported.3 Altered joint biomechanics in the presence of union are thought to account for the symptoms. The histopathology of tarsal coalition changes over time with gradual ossification of the fibrous bar.2 Progressive ossification limits hindfoot motion, interfering with joint mechanics, and leading to secondary inflammation that predisposes to joint degeneration. The increasing synostosis commonly leads to symptom onset in early to mid-adolescence. Tarsal coalition can present with varying complaints. These include ankle pain, rigid pes planus, limp, peroneal tendon contracture, tarsal tunnel syndrome and …
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.090 | 0.023 |
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".