MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973214406 · doi:10.5301/hip.2011.6504

Revision Hip Arthroplasty Using An Extensively Porous Coated Stem: Medium Term Results

2011· article· en· W1973214406 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Prakash Jayakumar, Ahmad Kamran Malik, Saif Ul Islam, Fares S. Haddad

Bibliographic record

VenueHip International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStress shieldingOsteolysisSurgeryHarris Hip ScoreProspective cohort studyFixation (population genetics)ArthroplastyTotal hip arthroplastyHip arthroplastyThighDentistryImplantPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a medium-term, prospective assessment of 56 revision total hip replacements using a.cementless, extensively porous-coated femoral stem.with a mean follow-up of 6 years. All implants demonstrated evidence of bony ingrowth and stable fixation with no cases of loosening, instability, deep infection, stress shielding, subsidence or osteolysis at last follow-up. Complications included two intra-operative fractures, three dislocations, one superficial infection, and one patient with thigh pain. No femoral stems were revised. Good to excellent clinical outcomes were achieved on Harris Hip Score (90% (n = 47/52), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index (92% (n = 48/52), and University of California Los Angeles activity score (96% (n=50/52). This supports the use of this system in the revision hip surgery armamentarium.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHip InternationalSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207