MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016865849 · doi:10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.204

Management of femoral neck fractures in the young patient: A critical analysis review

2014· review· en· W2016865849 on OpenAlexaff
Thierry Pauyo

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Orthopedics · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFemoral neckFemoral headValgusSurgeryInternal fixationFixation (population genetics)Dynamic hip screwPopulationOsteoporosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Femoral neck fractures account for nearly half of all hip fractures with the vast majority occurring in elderly patients after simple falls. Currently there may be sufficient evidence to support the routine use of hip replacement surgery for low demand elderly patients in all but non-displaced and valgus impacted femoral neck fractures. However, for the physiologically young patients, preservation of the natural hip anatomy and mechanics is a priority in management because of their high functional demands. The biomechanical challenges of femoral neck fixation and the vulnerability of the femoral head blood supply lead to a high incidence of non-union and osteonecrosis of the femoral head after internal fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures. Anatomic reduction and stable internal fixation are essentials in achieving the goals of treatment in this young patient population. Furthermore, other management variables such as surgical timing, the role of capsulotomy and the choice of implant for fixation remain controversial. This review will focus both on the demographics and injury profile of young patients with femoral neck fractures and the current evidence behind the surgical management of these injuries as well as their major secondary complications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations167
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of OrthopedicsSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207