SLAC WRIST IN THE ABSENCE OF RECOGNISED TRAUMA AND CPPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This comparative cohort study was designed to determine whether non-traumatic SLAC wrist exists, and is associated with abnormal carpal bone kinematics (specifically, decreased lunate flexion). METHODS: SLAC patients with no recognised history of upper extremity trauma were prospectively compared with an age-matched control group. RESULTS: Thirty-five subjects (69 wrists), included 33 non-traumatic SLAC wrists and 36 control wrists. The non-traumatic SLAC group had significantly different radiographic kinematic analysis compared to the control group. Flexion of the asymptomatic non-degenerative wrist of the non-traumatic SLAC group was distributed 70% through the lunocapitate (LC) joint and only 30% through the RL joint (p < 0.05). Conversely, flexion was more evenly distributed in the control group (48% LC and 52% RL). The non-traumatic SLAC group had abnormal wrist kinematics even in the non-involved side. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that non-traumatic SLAC does exist. We believe that non-traumatic SLAC begins with abnormal wrist kinematics and that the dorsal radiolunate ligament restricts lunate flexion but not scaphoid flexion, leading to increased SL angles and, with years, eventual attrition of the SL ligament.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".