Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome: Proximal, Distal, and Local Factors—International Research Retreat, April 30–May 2, 2009, Baltimore, Maryland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) is a clinical condition that is characterized by retropatellar and/or peripatellar pain associated with activities involving lower limb loading (eg, walking, running, jumping, stair climbing, and prolonged sitting and kneeling). PFPS is the most common overuse injury of the lower extremity, and is particularly prevalent in those who are physically active. While treatment for PFPS may be successful for the short-term, long-term results are less promising. The lack of long-term success in treating this condition may be due to the underlying etiologic factors not being addressed. While it is generally agreed that many factors can lead to PFPS, it is our contention that these factors are still not well-understood. The mission of this first international research retreat was to bring scientists together from around the world who were conducting research aimed at understanding the factors that are related to the development, and consequently the treatment, of PFPS. These etiologic factors were classified as local, distal, and proximal. A call for abstracts for the retreat was made in the summer of 2008. All abstracts were peer-reviewed for scientific merit and relevance to the retreat. In the end, 32 abstracts were accepted for podium presentations and 11 were accepted as posters. In total, 55 participants from 10 countries, including Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Singapore, United Kingdom, and the United States, contributed to the retreat. The format of the 2-day meeting included 3 keynote presentations interspersed with 15-minute podium presentations and 5-minute poster presentations. This first retreat was held in Fells Point, Baltimore, Maryland and was hosted by the Division of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy at the University of Southern California. Included in this PDF is a consensus statement, a listing of the presentations and authors, and abstracts of each of the presentations made at the conference. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010;40(3):A1–A48. doi:10.2519/jospt.2010.0302
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".