Paper #198 The effect of adjusted rehabilitation on osseous lesions associated with anterior cruciate ligament rupture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A controlled, prospective study of 23 patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction within one month of injury to determine the effect of restricting axial loading on osseous lesions. Twelve patients were randomized to a standard postoperative ACL rehabilitation program and 11 to an adjusted “non-axial loading” regime where axial- loading activities were replaced with cycling and pool exercises. All patients underwent plain radiography and bone scintigraphy with SPECT images pre-operatively and one year postoperatively. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Lysholm knee scale, the Mohtadi ACL-Quality of Life outcome measure (ACL-QOL), and the IKDC including KT-1000 arthrometry. A classification system for the osseous lesions was developed to grade the bone scan appearances of the “bone bruises”. Diffuse articular tracer uptake (DATU) was seen in a number of the one year postoperative bone scans and a grading system was also established for this entity. At one year the adjusted rehabilitation group had significantly better scores on the Lysholm and the ACL-QOL No differences were found between groups for the remainder of the clinical outcome measures or in the extent of residual persistent bone bruising on bone scintigraphy. There were more patients in the standard rehabilitation group with DATU at one year surgery, but this was not statistically significant. No significant benefit of a restricted axial loading rehabilitation program was demonstrated.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".