Age‐Related Differences in Radiographic Parameters for Femoroacetabular Impingement in Hip Arthroplasty Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the prevalence of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) radiographic findings between patients aged younger than 50 years and those aged 50 years or older who underwent total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Total hip arthroplasty patients aged younger than 50 years and those aged 50 years or older were identified retrospectively from a facility medical record database. Fifty patients from each group were randomly selected, and preoperative radiographs were collected. Dysplastic, inflammatory, post-traumatic, and osteonecrosis patients were excluded. Radiographs were evaluated for FAI-specific findings. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability was evaluated with κ statistics for categorical variables and intraclass correlation coefficients for continuous variables. An independent t test was used to compare continuous variables, χ(2) analysis was used for discrete variables, and a z ratio was used to analyze proportions. RESULTS: The mean age between the subgroups of patients aged younger than 50 years and those aged 50 years or older (43 years and 68 years, respectively) was significantly different (P < .05). Findings in the subgroup aged younger than 50 years included significantly more men (P < .001), decreased lateral joint space with maintained medial joint space (P < .05), significantly greater alpha angle on both the anteroposterior view and the frog-leg lateral view (P < .05), significantly higher Tönnis and Sharp angles (P < .01), and significantly lower center-edge angle (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective case series shows an increased prevalence of FAI findings (specifically cam pathology) in a patient population aged younger than 50 years undergoing total hip arthroplasty when compared with a cohort aged 50 years or older. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".