MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022106643 · doi:10.1097/bot.0b013e31821b8a09

Periprosthetic Distal Femur Fractures: Current Concepts

2011· review· en· W2022106643 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Nauth, Bill Ristevski, Thierry Bégué, Emil H. Schemitsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeriprostheticFemurStress shieldingFemur fractureStress fracturesSurgeryArthroplastyProsthesisOrthodonticsImplant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur most commonly present as fragility fractures associated with relatively minor trauma. These injuries are often complicated by osteopenia of the distal femur secondary to stress shielding or osteolysis. Effective management of periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur requires knowledge of both fracture fixation techniques and revision arthroplasty. This article reviews the treatment options for these challenging fractures with a particular focus on the management of displaced fractures with a stable prosthesis.

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)0.001
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations56
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic TraumaSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207