MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048989757 · doi:10.1097/bot.0000000000000191

Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Compared With ORIF and Primary Subtalar Arthrodesis for Treatment of Sanders Type IV Calcaneal Fractures

2014· article· en· W2048989757 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsTechnical University of Nova Scotia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal fixationAnkleVisual analogue scaleSubtalar jointCalcaneusCalcaneal fractureSurgeryReduction (mathematics)ArthrodesisRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To compare long-term health outcome of Sanders type IV calcaneal fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus ORIF plus primary subtalar arthrodesis (PSTA). DESIGN: Randomized prospective multicenter trial. SETTING: Four Level 1 trauma hospitals in Canada. PATIENTS: Thirty-one patients with 31 Sanders IV displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures. INTERVENTION: Seventeen patients were treated with a standard protocol involving a lateral approach for ORIF. Fourteen patients were treated with a standard protocol involving a lateral approach with ORIF + PSTA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Health outcomes were assessed with 4 validated instruments: (1) the Short Form 36 version 2 (SF-36), (2) the Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment Survey, (3) the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society's Ankle-Hindfoot Scale, and (4) the Visual Analogue Scale. RESULTS: From 2004 to 2011, 26 patients (26 displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures) were followed for a minimum of 2 years (81% follow-up). No statistical difference was found between the results for ORIF compared with ORIF + PSTA: the mean SF-36 physical component scores were, respectively, 30.2 (SD = 11.4) and 37.8 (SD = 10.4) (P = 0.10); the mean Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment Survey scores were 44.2 (SD = 25.6) and 37.9 (SD = 21.5) (P = 0.50); the mean Ankle-Hindfoot Scale scores were 62.5 (SD = 19.6) and 65.8 (SD = 19.2), (P = 0.68); and the mean Visual Analogue Scale scores were 36.8 (SD = 34.7) and 36.0 (SD = 30.7) (P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to demonstrate a significant difference between treating Sanders type IV fractures with either ORIF or ORIF + PSTA. It remains the choice of the surgeon and patient to take into account patient specific factors to determine treatment. However, ORIF + PSTA may be advantageous for both patients with Sanders type IV fractures and the health care system as patients heal quickly. Furthermore, ORIF + PSTA may prevent the need for late secondary subtalar fusion adding to increased costs and lost time from work. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.265 · 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