MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014537924 · doi:10.1097/blo.0b013e3180308456

The Epidemiology of Major Joint Contractures

2006· review· en· W2014537924 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 · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaLawson Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpidemiologyMuscle contractureJoint ContractureContractureMEDLINEIncidence (geometry)Physical therapySurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current knowledge on the epidemiology of major joint contractures is limited. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify studies examining the epidemiology of joint contracture regardless of clinical condition. Epidemiologic measures of interest were prevalence, incidence, and prognostic risk factors. We used Medline to identify all epidemiologic studies of major joint contractures published from 1966 to March 2005. There was a high prevalence of major joint contractures. Most studies focused on one joint rather than including all relevant major contractures. However, most studies did provide a definition of a contracture or the measures used to assess contractures. Immobility is a highly prevalent disability in at-risk populations, and constitutes a tremendous burden to patients in nursing homes, hospitals, and the outpatient community. The lack of epidemiologic data is a major impediment to providing appropriate 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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.139
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.139
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.016
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 head0.563
GPT teacher head0.670
Teacher spread0.107 · 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