MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A prospective study on knee proprioception after meniscal allograft transplantation

2006· article· en· W1980568095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Youri Thijs, Erik Witvrouw, B. Evens, Pascal Coorevits, Fredrik Almqvist, René Verdonk

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProprioceptionMedicineWOMACKnee JointOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyMeniscusTransplantationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationKnee painProspective cohort studySurgeryIncidence (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The meniscus plays an important role in the proprioceptive ability of the knee joint. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the short-term influence of a meniscus replacement on the proprioception of the knee. Fourteen patients who had undergone a fresh meniscal allograft transplantation between May 2001 and June 2003 were tested pre-operatively and 6 months post-operatively. Disability regarding pain, stiffness and functionality of the affected knee during daily activities was measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis (WOMAC) scale. The knee joint position sense was assessed using the Biodex System 3 isokinetic dynamometer. The results of the WOMAC scale showed no significant differences concerning pain, stiffness or knee function between the pre- and post-operative condition of the knee. Assessment of the knee joint position sense at a reference point of 70 degrees of knee flexion revealed a significant improvement of the proprioception of the operated knee at 6 months after surgery compared with the pre-operative condition. The results of this study suggest that although no significant improvement of pain and functionality of the operated knee occurred at this short-term follow-up period, a meniscal allograft transplantation seems to have a significant positive effect on the joint position sense of the previously meniscectomised knee.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in SportsSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207