The Medial Collateral Ligament of the Elbow is not Isometric
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The anterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament (AMCL) of the elbow has been shown to be the most important valgus stabilizer of the elbow. However, the isometry of this band has not been quantified. HYPOTHESIS: Isometric fibers exist within the AMCL, and these fibers are located within its central region. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Twelve cadaveric elbow specimens were mounted in a testing apparatus in a valgus gravity-loaded orientation. Passive supinated flexion was performed and the motion recorded using an electromagnetic tracking device. Hundreds of attachment points for the AMCL of the elbow were recorded on the medial epicondyle and ulna. The overall change in length between each point on the ulna to every humeral point, throughout the arc of motion, was quantified (DeltaL = Lmax - Lmin). The locations of the smallest DeltaL values were determined relative to the attachment site of the AMCL on the medial epicondyle. RESULTS: True isometry was not found throughout the arc of flexion. The smallest DeltaL values averaged 2.8 +/- 1.2 mm (range: 0.7 mm to 5.2 mm). Isometric fibers do not exist within the AMCL; however, "nearly" isometric areas are located on the lateral aspect of the attachment site of the AMCL on the medial epicondyle, near the anatomic axis of rotation. CONCLUSIONS: We postulate that these nearly isometric areas would be the most ideal location for graft attachment during reconstruction of the AMCL.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".