MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994855047 · doi:10.1177/03635465010290031101

Outcome of Surgery for Chronic Achilles Tendinopathy

2001· review· en· W1994855047 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTendinopathyPhysical therapyAchilles tendonSurgeryOutcome (game theory)Internal medicineTendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Achilles tendinopathy is often treated surgically after failure of nonoperative management, but results are not uniformly excellent. We critically assessed the methods of 26 studies that reported surgical outcomes of patients with this condition. Using 10 previously published criteria, and blinded to study outcomes, we derived a "methodology score" (0 to 100) for each study. This score was highly reproducible (r = 0.99, P < 0.01). Scores were generally low concerning the type of study, subject selection process, and outcome measures, which indicates methods deficiency in the way the study was designed, performed, and analyzed. We found a negative correlation between reported success rate and overall methods scores (r = -0.53, P < 0.01), and a positive correlation between year of publication and overall methods score (r = 0.70, P < 0.01). Study methods may influence reported surgical outcome, and we suggest guidelines for improving study design in this area of clinical research. We acknowledge that study methods have improved over the course of the past 20 years.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.310 · 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