Bibliographic record
Abstract
European nations, especially Scandinavian countries, have used cemented fixation since the introduction of total hip arthroplasty. In Sweden, with arguably the best national-level data on prostheses survivorship, >90% of all stems are fixated with cement. In sharp contrast, it is estimated that in the United States, >88% of all femoral stems use cementless technology. This represents a diametrically opposed difference in philosophical approach: the so-called North Atlantic Divide. The departure in North America from cemented femoral stems can be traced to the coinage of the phrase "cement disease," which implicated cement as a leading cause of osteolysis. This led to prolific innovation of uncemented technologies in North America, while European countries favored standardization enabled by the national arthroplasty registries. The term "cement disease" has been proven to be a misnomer, as supported by excellent outcomes from the Scandinavian registries, as well as excellent long-term outcomes for cemented stems in United States series, even in patients younger than 50 years. Like uncemented stems, there is variability in survivorship between femoral stems, and this appears to be related to specific design features. Despite the excellent long-term results, the use of cemented femoral components in Europe and Canada is decreasing in favor of uncemented stems. The reasons for this are not immediately obvious.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".