MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Treatment of Idiopathic Clubfoot Utilizing Botulinum A Toxin

2005· article· en· W2050121908 on OpenAlexaff
Christine M. Alvarez, Stephen J. Tredwell, Sean Keenan, Richard Beauchamp, Rachel L. Choit, Bonita Sawatzky, Mary A. De Vera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClubfootTenotomyDeformityAnkleSurgeryAchilles tendonPonseti methodBotulinum toxinAnkle dorsiflexionTendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pivotal point in most clubfoot management protocols is Achilles tendon lengthening or tenotomy to address hindfoot deformity. The effectiveness of botulinum A toxin (BTX-A) in attenuating the function of the triceps surae muscle complex as an alternative to tenotomy was investigated. Fifty-one patients with 73 idiopathic clubfeet were recruited. Outcome measures included surgical rate, Pirani clubfoot score, ankle dorsiflexion with knee in flexion and extension, and recurrences. Patients were divided according to age: group 1 (<30 days old) and group 2 (>30 days and <8 months old). Ankle dorsiflexion in knee flexion and extension remained above 20 degrees and 15 degrees, respectively, and Pirani scores below 0.5 following BTX-A injection for both groups. One of the 51 patients required limited posterior release and 9 patients required repeat manipulation and casting plus or minus BTX-A injection. The use of BTX-A as an adjunctive therapy in the noninvasive approach of manipulation and casting in idiopathic clubfoot is a safe and effective treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations58
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207