MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058579831 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2011.08.113

Paper # 113: Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With and Without Acromiplasty in the Treatment Of Full‐Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears: A Multi‐Centre, Randomized Controlled Trial

2011· article· en· W2058579831 on OpenAlexaff
Randy Mascarenhas, Peter B. MacDonald, Sheila McRae, Jeff Leiter, Peter Lapner

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPan Am Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotator cuffAcromioplastyMedicineTearsRandomized controlled trialSurgeryCuffRotator cuff injury

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this randomized controlled trial of 86 patients, no differences in quality of life or functional measures were seen between those who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with acromioplasty compared to those undergoing repair alone; however, there was a significantly higher re-operation rate in those without acromioplasty, particularly those with Type-2 and -3 acromions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207