MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Locked Flexible Intramedullary Humerus Nail in Pediatric Femur and Tibia Shaft Fractures

2004· article· en· W1972835630 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Bienkowski, Edward J. Harvey, Rudy Reindl, Greg Berry, Thierry E. Benaroch, Jean Ouellet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntramedullary rodHumerusFixation (population genetics)SurgeryFemurTibiaNail (fastener)Orthopedic surgeryOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are several options for the treatment of long bone fractures in skeletally immature patients. Surgeon experience, type of fracture, and the possibility of damage to the physeal area dictate individual fracture management patterns. Notably, nail devices have not gained popularity in this patient group. Intramedullary locking nails have become the standard of care in adult patients due to decreased morbidity and mortality. A novel nail has been developed for humeral shaft fractures that uses a lateral starting position to avoid damage to the rotator cuff in humeral fracture fixation. This is possible because of the nail's transient flexibility during insertion. This study illustrates that it is feasible to insert this type of nail through multiple entry portals for both tibial and femoral fracture fixation, without damaging the physeal blood supply or growth areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207