MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988291150 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-20-07-450

Management of Posttraumatic Radioulnar Synostosis

2012· review· en· W1988291150 on OpenAlexaff
Stephane G. Bergeron, Nicholas M. Desy, Mitchell Bernstein, Edward J. Harvey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSynostosisForearmSurgeryUlnaComplicationElbowRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posttraumatic radioulnar synostosis is a rare complication following fracture of the forearm and elbow. Risk factors for synostosis are related to the initial injury and surgical management of the fracture. Typically, patients present with complete loss of active and passive forearm pronation and supination. Evidence of bridging heterotopic bone between the radius and ulna can be seen on plain radiographs. Although nonsurgical management is sufficient in some cases, surgical excision is typically required. The timing of surgical intervention remains controversial. However, early resection between 6 and 12 months after the initial injury can be performed safely in patients with radiographic evidence of bony maturation. Surgical management consists of complete resection of the synostosis with optional interposition of biologic or synthetic materials to restore forearm rotation. A low recurrence rate can be achieved following primary radioulnar synostosis excision without the need for routine adjuvant prophylaxis.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations37
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicElbow and Forearm Trauma TreatmentFrench-language works237,207