Craniocervical fusion for rheumatoid arthritis: comparison of sublaminar wires and the lateral mass screw craniocervical fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of rheumatoid arthritis patients with C1/2 instability causing neck pain and neurological compromise can be treated with unisegmental fusion. However, a minority will require decompression and more extensive craniocervical fusion. Two cohorts of patients with rheumatoid arthritis requiring decompression and craniocervical fusion were included in a retrospective study comparing sublaminar wiring (Ransford Loop, n = 10, follow-up = 36 +/- 9.5 months) and lateral mass screws (Cervifix system, n = 11; follow-up = 39.7 +/- 7.9 months). Both cohorts of patients experienced significant improvements in high cervical pain scores [McGill 5-point score; preop = 4.5 +/- 0.75 for Cervifix and 4.5 +/- 0.75 for Ransford loop; postop = 1.17 +/- 0.9 (p = 0.003) for Cervifix (at 39.7 months +/-7.9) and 2.8 +/- 1.6 (p = 0.011) for Ransford loop (at 36 +/- 9.5 months)]. Lateral mass screws for craniocervical fusion (seven out of 11 pain free) appear to produce better early results for rheumatoid arthritis patients suffering high cervical neck pain than sublaminar wire techniques (three out of 10 pain free).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".