The Association Between Avulsions of the Reflected Head of the Rectus Femoris and Labral Tears
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate if an association existed between the reflected head of rectus femoris avulsion injuries and labral tears in pediatric patients referred for magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation. METHODS: Electronic medical records of the patients between the ages of 12 and 18 who were treated at the hospitals affiliated by McMaster University between June 2000 and November 2010 with a diagnosis of rectus femoris avulsion injuries were retrospectively identified and analyzed. Patients were included if they had magnetic resonance imaging or MRA images of their hip. RESULTS: Nine patients with avulsion injuries of the rectus femoris muscle were identified. The patient population consisted of 4 females and 5 males (range, 8 to 17 y, mean age 14 y). All injuries occurred during sports activity, which included running and kicking during soccer, skating in hockey, and a squatting exercise. MRA examination of 7 of these patients demonstrated associated labral tears. All patients were initially treated conservatively. Five patients continued to sustain from residual pain in the 9 months after the initial injury. Two of these patients with significant refractory pain were subsequently treated with hip arthroscopy. Intraoperatively, 1 small labral tear and 1 labral avulsion were identified and treated. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there may be an association between avulsion of the reflected head of rectus femoris and labral injuries and that there may be an underlying spectrum of traction injuries. Patients with rectus femoris avulsion injuries with persistent symptoms may be at risk for concurrent traumatic labral tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4, retrospective case series.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".