Functional Outcome After Tibial Tubercle Transfer for the Painful Patella Alta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-five patients with painful patella alta without symptomatic subluxation were identified in a prospective database. All patients had a distal tibial tubercle transfer and preoperative knee arthroscopy. The mean postoperative followup was 2.4 years. These patients were matched with healthy volunteers. Patellofemoral scores using the scoring systems of Kujala et al and Lysholm and Gillquist were collected prospectively. The Short Form-36 health survey and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index were used postoperatively. Significant improvement in the patellofemoral scores was documented postoperatively; however, the healthy volunteers had significantly higher patellofemoral scores when compared with the patients who were treated surgically. For the three Short Form-36 survey parameters based on physical health (physical functioning, role physical, and bodily pain), there were no statistically significant differences between the patients and the United States age-matched norms; data are available in the Short Form-36 survey manual. Patients with Grade 2 chondromalacia (fissuring and fragmentation less than 1.25 cm) had significantly better scores in pain and function domains of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index compared with patients with Grade 3 (fissuring and fragmentation greater than 1.25 cm) and Grade 4 (erosion down to bone) changes. Distal tibial tubercle transfer is a beneficial procedure for treating patients with painful patella alta.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".