MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Roper-Tuke total elbow arthroplasty

2000· article· en· W1983114693 on OpenAlexaff
O. N. Yanni, C. B. d'A. Fearn, S C Gallannaugh, R. Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineElbowSurgeryArthroplastyUlnar nerveRadiological weapon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the results of a series of 59 unconstrained total arthroplasties of the elbow after a mean follow-up of 6.5 years (4 to 10). All the patients had rheumatoid arthritis. The indication for surgery was pain in all but one. Outcome was assessed by the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI). Of the 59 arthroplasties, two were lost to follow-up. Ten patients died, but as two of their arthroplasties were failures we included them in the results. The outcome in the remaining 49 was excellent in 26 (53%), good in 15 (31%), fair in one (2%) and poor or a failure in seven (14%). There was an improvement in the pain score (p < 0.001), movement (p < 0.001) and function (p < 0.001). Two patients developed instability, but neither required further surgery. There was a mean increase of 21° in flexion and of 7° in extension. The overall rate of complications was 33.9%. Lesions of the ulnar nerve, one of which did not recover, occurred in four patients, deep infection in two and stiffness in five. The rates of complications were similar to those in recent reports of other elbow arthroplasties. We carried out a radiological analysis of 39 arthroplasties which showed radiolucent lines around the humeral component in 22 and the ulnar component in 15. There were lower scores on the MEPI for those with radiolucent lines around the humeral component.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.192 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations22
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British VolumeSame topicElbow and Forearm Trauma TreatmentFrench-language works237,207