MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019082547 · doi:10.1055/s-0033-1360653

Indications for Surgical Management of Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Knee in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review

2013· review· en· W2019082547 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren E. Salci, Olufemi R. Ayeni, Marcel Abouassaly, Forough Farrokhyar, Joanne D’Souza, Mohit Bhandari, Devin Peterson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Knee Surgery · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteochondritis dissecansConcomitantMEDLINEPopulationSurgeryPhysical therapyGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several case series have been published exploring the surgical management of osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) of the knee in pediatric patients. This systemic review was performed to identify the surgical indications for this condition. A search of the Embase and Ovid Medline databases was performed to identify clinical studies reporting outcomes of surgical management of OCD in the knee in this patient population. A quality assessment of the included articles was conducted independently by two reviewers using a quality assessment tool developed by Yang et al. A total of 25 articles met the eligibility criteria and were reviewed; 40% of studies did not clearly describe their surgical indications. The remainder of the studies had a failure of nonoperative management with or without the concomitant use of imaging as their indication for surgery, or used lesion stability itself as the indication for surgery. This review outlines several surgical indications presented in the literature for the treatment of OCD lesions of the knee in the pediatric population. The most common indication for surgery was a failure of a trial of nonoperative treatment with or without the concomitant use of serial imaging. Although the quality of the case series was high, inconsistencies in reporting radiographic and arthroscopic classification of the OCD lesion were common.

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 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)0.004
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Knee SurgerySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207