MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012316552 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.g.01358

The Geometry of the Tibial Plateau and Its Influence on the Biomechanics of the Tibiofemoral Joint

2008· article· en· W2012316552 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

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiomechanicsJoint (building)Plateau (mathematics)GeometryOrthodonticsGeologyKnee JointAnatomyMedicineMathematicsEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematical analysisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The geometry of the tibial plateau is complex and asymmetric. Previous research has characterized subject-to-subject differences in the tibial plateau geometry in the sagittal plane on the basis of a single parameter, the posterior slope. We hypothesized that (1) there are large subject-to-subject variations in terms of slopes, the depth of concavity of the medial plateau, and the extent of convexity of the lateral plateau; (2) medial tibial slope and lateral tibial slope are different within subjects; (3) there are sex-based differences in the slopes as well as concavities and convexities of the tibial plateau; and (4) age is not associated with any of the measured parameters. METHODS: The medial, lateral, and coronal slopes and the depth of the osseous portion of the tibial plateau were measured with use of sagittal and coronal magnetic resonance images that were made for thirty-three female and twenty-two male subjects, and differences between the sexes with respect to these four parameters were assessed. Within-subject differences between the medial and lateral tibial slopes also were assessed. Correlation tests were performed to examine the existence of a linear relationship between various slopes as well as between slopes and subject age. RESULTS: The range of subject-to-subject variations in the tibial slopes was substantive for males and females. However, the mean medial and lateral tibial slopes in female subjects were greater than those in male subjects (p < 0.05). In contrast, the mean coronal tibial slope in female subjects was less than that in male subjects (p < 0.05). The correlation between medial and lateral tibial slopes was poor. The within-subject difference between medial and lateral tibial slopes was significant (p < 0.05). No difference in medial tibial plateau depth was found between the sexes. The subchondral bone on the lateral part of the tibia, within the articulation region, was mostly flat. Age was not associated with the observed results. CONCLUSIONS: The geometry of the osseous portion of the tibial plateau is more robustly explained by three slopes and the depth of the medial tibial condyle.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.192 · 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