Biomechanical Analysis of Fixation of Middle Third Fractures of the Clavicle
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This biomechanical study compares four different techniques of fixation of middle third clavicular fractures. METHODS: Twenty fresh-frozen clavicles were randomized into four groups. Each group used a different fixation device (3.5 Synthes reconstruction plate, 3.5 Synthes limited contact dynamic compression plate, 3.5 Synthes locking compression plate, and 4.5 DePuy Rockwood clavicular pin). All constructs were mechanically tested in bending and torque modes both with and without a simulated inferior cortical defect. Bending load to failure was also conducted. The four groups were compared using an analysis of variance test. RESULTS: The plate constructs were stiffer than the pin during both pure bending and torque loads with or without an inferior cortical defect. Bending load to failure with an inferior cortical defect revealed that the reconstruction plate was weaker compared with the other three groups. The limited contact and locking plates were stiffer than the reconstruction plate but demonstrated statistical significance only with the cortical defect. CONCLUSIONS: As hypothesized, the 3.5 limited contact dynamic compression plate and 3.5 locking compression plate demonstrated the greatest resistance to bending and torque loads, especially in the presence of simulated comminution of a middle third clavicular fracture. The reconstruction plate demonstrated lower stiffness and strength values compared with the other plates, especially with a cortical defect, whereas the pin showed poor resistance to bending and torque loads in all modes of testing. This information may help surgeons to choose the most appropriate method of fixation when treating fractures of the middle third of the clavicle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it