MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001416110 · doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3345-4

Subungual Exostosis of the Toes: A Systematic Review

2013· review· en· W2001416110 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

VenueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of CalgaryRoyal Columbian Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExostosisMEDLINECochrane LibraryCINAHLNail (fastener)SurgeryDeformitySystematic reviewDermatologyRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Subungual exostosis is a relatively common benign bone tumor that occurs in the distal phalanges of the toes and can be a source of pain and nail deformity. There is controversy about the treatment of these lesions and there are few studies that have synthesized what is known and provided meaningful information on treatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a systematic review to address the following questions: (1) What is the best surgical approach for excising these lesions? (2) What is the age range, sex distribution, and presenting symptoms of subungual exostoses and which toe is most frequently affected? (3) What complications arise from treatment? METHODS: Two authors independently searched multiple databases (Medline, 1950-May 2013; Cochrane EBM database, and EMBASE, 1980-May 2013 provided by OVID; ACP Journal Club, 2003-May 2013; CINAHL by EBSCO, 1937-May 2013; and PubMed by NLM, 1940-May 2013), and key words were chosen to achieve a broad search strategy. We included studies on the management of toe exostoses with > 10 cases and we excluded studies that reported on upper extremity exostoses or osteochondromas. Demographic and treatment data were collected from each article by two independent authors and collated. A total of 124 abstracts were screened, and 116 articles were reviewed in full, of which 13 met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Complete marginal excision through a fish mouth incision protecting the nail led to a recurrence rate of 4% and satisfactory clinical results, defined as no requirement for postoperative intervention and a satisfactory clinical appearance in 73%. Most studies provided incomplete descriptions of specific surgical techniques used. Fifty-five percent of the patients were younger than 18 years of age. A history of toe trauma before diagnosis was present in approximately 30% of the cases. Delayed diagnosis occurred in approximately 10% of the cases and onychodystrophy occurred in more than 10%. CONCLUSIONS: There is weak evidence to guide management of subungual exostosis. Adequate wound management postexcision aiming to minimize disruption to the nail bed and matrix may prevent onychodystrophy, which is a common complication of treatment.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.272 · 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