Ottawa ankle rules and subjective surgeon perception to evaluate radiograph necessity following foot and ankle sprain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Foot and ankle injuries are frequent in emergency departments. Although only a few patients with foot and ankle sprain present fractures and the fracture patterns are almost always simple, lack of fracture diagnosis can lead to poor functional outcomes. AIM: The present study aims to evaluate the reliability of the Ottawa ankle rules and the orthopedic surgeon subjective perception to assess foot and ankle fractures after sprains. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from July 2012 to December 2012. Ethical approval was granted. Two hundred seventy-four adult patients admitted to the emergency department with foot and/or ankle sprain were evaluated by an orthopedic surgeon who completed a questionnaire prior to radiographic assessment. The Ottawa ankle rules and subjective perception of foot and/or ankle fractures were evaluated on the questionnaire. RESULTS: Thirteen percent (36/274) patients presented fracture. Orthopedic surgeon subjective analysis showed 55.6% sensitivity, 90.1% specificity, 46.5% positive predictive value and 92.9% negative predictive value. The general orthopedic surgeon opinion accuracy was 85.4%. The Ottawa ankle rules presented 97.2% sensitivity, 7.8% specificity, 13.9% positive predictive value, 95% negative predictive value and 19.9% accuracy respectively. Weight-bearing inability was the Ottawa ankle rule item that presented the highest reliability, 69.4% sensitivity, 61.6% specificity, 63.1% accuracy, 21.9% positive predictive value and 93% negative predictive value respectively. CONCLUSION: The Ottawa ankle rules showed high reliability for deciding when to take radiographs in foot and/or ankle sprains. Weight-bearing inability was the most important isolated item to predict fracture presence. Orthopedic surgeon subjective analysis to predict fracture possibility showed a high specificity rate, representing a confident method to exclude unnecessary radiographic exams.
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 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 | 0.032 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".