MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032390405 · doi:10.1359/jbmr.070418

Natural History of Hyperplastic Callus Formation in Osteogenesis Imperfecta Type V

2007· article· en· W2032390405 on OpenAlexaff
Moira Cheung, Francis H. Glorieux, Frank Rauch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnective tissue disorders research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteogenesis imperfectaContext (archaeology)MedicineCallusComplicationSurgeryPathologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Hyperplastic callus formation was assessed in 23 patients with osteogenesis imperfecta type V. Hyperplastic callus mostly affected long bones in the lower extremities and occurred predominantly during phases of rapid growth. INTRODUCTION: Hyperplastic callus (HPC) formation is one of the most conspicuous features of osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) type V, but the natural history of HPC has not been well characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective single-center study, we assessed HPC in 23 OI type V patients (9 females and 14 males). RESULTS: Fifteen patients (65%) had HPC at 48 skeletal sites, 30 of which affected the lower limbs. The number of HPC sites per patient ranged from 0 to 7, with an average of 2.6 for men and 1.1 for women (p = 0.047 for this sex difference; t-test). New HPC formation was observed both after fractures and outside of the context of fractures. Only a minority of lower limb fractures (26%) precipitated HPC formation. After an initial enlargement phase, HPC lesions usually stabilized, but could also resolve completely (n = 2) or progress and lead to bone deformation. The most common complication of HPC was a fracture through the lesion (n = 7). Neither pamidronate nor indomethacin seemed to influence the course of HPC. CONCLUSIONS: HPC is a potentially serious complication of OI type V. Given the rarity of the disorder, treatment studies will require multicenter collaborations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations80
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicConnective tissue disorders researchFrench-language works237,207