Plate Fixation of Talar Neck Fractures: Preliminary Review of a New Technique in Twenty-three Patients
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
OBJECTIVE: To describe an unreported technique of fixation for talar neck fractures. DESIGN: Retrospective review and telephone interview of patients with fractures of the talar neck (OTA 72-A1.2, 72-A1.3, 72-C2). SETTING: Level-one trauma center with six trauma surgeons. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three patients treated with minifragment plates over a four-year period. Follow-up intervals were an average of twenty months. INTERVENTION: Talar neck fractures were stabilized with one or two 2.0 or 2.4 plates, with additional 2.0, 2.7, or 3.5 lag screws when necessary. Most fractures were approached through medial and lateral incisions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Union rates, pain, and incidence of complications. Functional outcome will be best determined by a further review with longer follow-up. RESULTS: Mini fragment plates were placed on the side with the most comminution, and all wounds and fractures healed uneventfully. Four patients underwent hardware removal. Two patients developed a mild extension malunion, but there was no evidence of varus malunion, as measured on Canale views. CONCLUSIONS: Initial review suggests that plate fixation of comminuted talar neck fractures is a successful technique, with low rates of complications compared with those discussed in the literature. A further review in a few years will allow functional assessment studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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