MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Science: Principles for Clinical Management of Bone

2000· article· en· W1996192451 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John M. Medeiros

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationMedicineClinical PracticeOsteoporosisPhysical therapyMedical educationPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Science: Principles for Clinical Management of Bone Editor: LUNDON, Katie, B.Sc. (PT), M.Sc., Ph.D. (University of Toronto) Bibliographic Data: (ISBN: 0–7506-7155–6, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000) 204 pages, contributors, soft cover Audiences: Physical Therapists, Physical Therapy StudentsSubjects: Physical Therapy, Physical Medicine, and Rehabilitation Other Info: The book contains black-and-white illustrations. DESCRIPTION: This book is a presentation of current basic science concepts underlying the anatomy, physiology, biomechanics, and pathophysiology of bone. The effects of exercise and immobilization and the diagnosis and clinical management of bone tumors, osteoporosis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and other bone disorders are also covered. PURPOSE: The purposes are fourfold: to present current basic science background underlying mineralized dense connective tissue dynamics in health and selected disease states commonly encountered in clinical practice; to serve as a practical reference by offering a comprehensive and integrated text on bone metabolism, selected skeletal disorders, and pertinent applications to clinical practice in physical rehabilitation; to facilitate the understanding of the basic science mechanisms of skeletal pathophysiology that underlie clinical decision making in the assessment and treatment of selected mineralized connective tissue disorders and metabolic bone diseases; and to enhance clinical practice by providing current rationale as well as potential research directions in the assessment and treatment of conditions affecting bone. AUDIENCE: The book is written for health professional students and practicing clinicians. The editor and her two contributing authors have produced an important contribution to the literature on orthopedic rehabilitation science of adult bone. Her persuasive manner of writing contributes to her success in fulfilling her objectives. ASSESSMENT: This book is both academically rigorous and clinically relevant. It is an essential addition to the library of anyone studying or practicing in the field of orthopedic rehabilitation science. SCORE: Weighted Numerical Score: 94 - ****

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.021

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→