MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018621986 · doi:10.3109/10929088.2014.894126

3D atlas-based registration can calculate malalignment of femoral shaft fractures in six degrees of freedom

2014· article· en· W2018621986 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

VenueComputer Aided Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)Degrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Femoral shaftComputer scienceOrthodonticsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceGeologyMedicineFemurPhysicsAnatomySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study presents and evaluates a semi-automated algorithm for quantifying malalignment in complex femoral shaft fractures from a single intraoperative cone-beam CT (CBCT) image of the fractured limb. METHODS: CBCT images were acquired of complex comminuted diaphyseal fractures created in 9 cadaveric femora (27 cases). Scans were segmented using intensity-based thresholding, yielding image stacks of the proximal, distal and comminuted bone. Semi-deformable and rigid affine registrations to an intact femur atlas (synthetic or cadaveric-based) were performed to transform the distal fragment to its neutral alignment. Leg length was calculated from the volume of bone within the comminution fragment. The transformations were compared to the physical input malalignments. RESULTS: Using the synthetic atlas, translations were within 1.71 ± 1.08 mm (medial/lateral) and 2.24 ± 2.11 mm (anterior/posterior). The varus/valgus, flexion/extension and periaxial rotation errors were 3.45 ± 2.6°, 1.86 ± 1.5° and 3.4 ± 2.0°, respectively. The cadaveric-based atlas yielded similar results in medial/lateral and anterior/posterior translation (1.73 ± 1.28 mm and 2.15 ± 2.13 mm, respectively). Varus/valgus, flexion/extension and periaxial rotation errors were 2.3 ± 1.3°, 2.0 ± 1.6° and 3.4 ± 2.0°, respectively. Leg length errors were 1.41 ± 1.01 mm (synthetic) and 1.26 ± 0.94 mm (cadaveric). The cadaveric model demonstrated a small improvement in flexion/extension and the synthetic atlas performed slightly faster (6 min 24 s ± 50 s versus 8 min 42 s ± 2 min 25 s). CONCLUSIONS: This atlas-based algorithm quantified malalignment in complex femoral shaft fractures within clinical tolerances from a single CBCT image of the fractured limb.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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