MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055645334 · doi:10.1177/0363546508314409

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Open to Arthroscopic Acromioplasty with Mini-Open Rotator Cuff Repair for Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears

2008· article· en· W2055645334 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas G. Mohtadi, Robert M. Hollinshead, Treny M. Sasyniuk, Jennifer A. Fletcher, Denise Chan, Feng X. Li

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSaint John Regional HospitalAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Orthopaedic Foundation
KeywordsRotator cuffAcromioplastyMedicineTearsSurgeryRotator cuff injuryCuffArthroscopyRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears affect patients' quality of life. The evolution toward less invasive operative techniques for rotator cuff repair requires appropriate comparisons with the standard open procedure, using validated outcomes in a randomized fashion. HYPOTHESIS: There is no difference in disease-specific quality of life outcomes at 2 years between an open surgical repair (open) versus an arthroscopic acromioplasty with mini-open (scope mini-open) repair for patients with full-thickness rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Patients with unremitting pain, failed nonoperative treatment, and imaging indicating full-thickness rotator cuff tears were included in the study. Massive irreparable cuff tears were excluded. Patients were assessed using the disease-specific Rotator Cuff-Quality of Life index, which produces a maximum score of 100, representing a high quality of life. Secondary shoulder-specific outcomes (American Shoulder and Elbow Society, Shoulder Rating Questionnaire, and Functional Shoulder Elevation Test) were also measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. RESULTS: The mean Rotator Cuff-Quality of Life scores at an average follow-up of 28 months were not statistically different: open, 86.9 (95% confidence interval: 81.8-92.0); and scope mini-open, 87.2 (95% confidence interval: 80.6-93.8). At 3 months, the patients who underwent scope mini-open showed statistically significantly better outcomes (55.6 vs 71.3; P = .005). The baseline to 3-month difference in Rotator Cuff-Quality of Life scores between the scope mini-open and open groups was also statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Patient outcomes improved from baseline to all postoperative measurement intervals. There was no difference in outcome at 1 and 2 years after surgery between the scope mini-open and open procedures. The quality of life of patients undergoing the arthroscopic acromioplasty with mini-open rotator cuff repair improved statistically significantly and clinically at 3 months compared with the open group.

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)0.008
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations99
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207