Complete Digital Amputations Undergoing Replantation Surgery: A 10-Year Retrospective Study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a result of growing expertise and skill, replantation surgery has evolved to more than the technical reattachment of an amputated part. METHODS: A retrospective study of complete digital amputations undergoing replantation surgery was conducted for the purpose of assessing trends in these complex cases. All incomplete and partial amputations were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients who had replantation surgery between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 2003 for 278 completely amputated digits were reviewed. Of the 171 patients, 91 (53 %) had work-related injuries. The main mechanism of injury was saw injury (95 patients) for both occupational- and non-occupational-related injuries. The proximal phalanx was the most common level of amputation and the thumb was most frequently involved. The injuries happened more commonly in the summer months. Microvascular failure occurred in 29 % of the replanted digits and was most commonly associated with avulsion-type injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Complete amputations represent a more complex injury than incomplete amputations, with a higher failure rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it