Classifying Intertrochanteric Fractures of the Proximal Femur: Does Experience Matter?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This prospective study aimed to evaluate inter-observer agreement of the AO/OTA and Evans/Jensen classification systems with an emphasis on the effect of reviewer experience. In addition, the level of agreement in the determination of fracture stability across varying levels of experience was evaluated. SUBJECT AND METHODS: A group of 12 reviewers (6 surgeons, 3 senior residents, 3 junior residents) independently assessed 56 radiographs of intertrochanteric hip fractures and classified them using the AO/OTA and Evans/Jensen systems. Reviewers further assessed the stability of the fracture patterns. RESULTS: Overall, higher agreement was obtained for the AO/OTA classification than with the Evans/Jensen classification. However, neither classification system met acceptable thresholds for reliability. Surgeons were unable to reliability determine if fractures were stable or unstable. Increased experience improved AO/OTA classification reliability and assessment of stability but decreased agreement in the Evans/Jensen classification. CONCLUSION: The AO/OTA classification should be used in favor of the Evans/Jensen classification whenever possible. Our findings suggest that surgeons' perceptions about stability vary to a significant extent thereby necessitating clear definitions of stability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it