MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065185972 · doi:10.1542/gr.7-3-25

Ankle Injury: Use of Clinical Criteria Can Limit Radiography

2002· article· en· W2065185972 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel R. Neuspiel

Bibliographic record

VenueAAP Grand Rounds · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIconAnkleCitationRadiographyPhysical examinationGeneral surgerySurgeryLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Source:Boutis K, Komar L, Jaramillo D, et al. Sensitivity of a clinical examination to predict need for radiography in children with ankle injuries: a prospective study. Lancet. 2001;358:2118–2121.Radiographs are frequently ordered for children presenting with an ankle injury. Investigators from Boston and Toronto assessed the predictive value of the clinical examination to de. ne a low-risk group whose management would not be affected by the absence of a radiograph. They hypothesized that no more than 1% of children with low-risk exams (de. ned as pain and/or tenderness with or without edema or ecchymoses restricted to the distal fibula, the 3 adjacent ligaments, or both) would have fractures at risk of complications. (Potentially uncomplicated fractures included all except avulsion, buckle, and non-displaced Salter-Harris I and II fractures of distal fibula). They also compared the accuracy of their low-risk criteria with the Ottawa ankle rules (radiographs required only if there is pain near the malleoli accompanied by 1 or more of the following: inability to bear weight; bone tenderness at the posterior edge; or bone tenderness at the tip of either malleolus).1Clinical examinations and subsequent radiographs were prospectively and independently evaluated in 2 pediatric emergency departments among healthy 3- to 16-year-old children with acute ankle injuries. Of 607 enrolled children, 381 had low-risk and 226 had high-risk clinical examinations. None of the 381 children with low-risk examinations had a high-risk fracture (negative predictive value 100%; 95% CI, 99.2-100). Of 226 children with high-risk clinical examinations, 45 had a signi. cant fracture (positive predictive value 20%; 95% CI, 14.9-25.7). Using the proposed low-risk criteria, the ankle examination has a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 93.3-100) and a speci. city of 68%. If these criteria were applied, radiographs could be omitted in 63% of children with ankle injuries compared to a 12% reduction using the Ottawa ankle rules.This study shows that a clinical exam can successfully predict which children can avoid radiography following ankle trauma. Their exam criteria are simpler than the previously described Ottawa ankle rules1 and were more effective in reducing the number of radiographs. The investigators point out that their findings may not apply to clinicians with less training and experience in the clinical examination of children’s ankles. Most pediatricians should be able to apply this test and avoid unnecessary ankle x-rays.It is important to recognize that a low-risk examination using the proposed criteria does not rule out an ankle fracture, but it does provide assurance that if a fracture is present it is unlikely to be unstable or at risk for complications. There remains some controversy about how best to manage this low-risk group, but all would agree that close follow-up is essential.

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)0.000
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 score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAP Grand RoundsSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207