MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088757953 · doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7478.1328

Tibialis posterior dysfunction: a common and treatable cause of adult acquired flatfoot

2004· review· en· W2088757953 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Kohls-Gatzoulis, John Angel, Dishan Singh, Fares S. Haddad, Julian Livingstone, Greg Berry

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnkleDeformityPodiatristFoot deformityFoot (prosody)Tarsal tunnel syndromeOrthopedic surgeryPes planusPhysical therapySurgeryComplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adults with an acquired flatfoot deformity may present not with foot deformity but almost uniformly with medial foot pain and decreased function of the affected foot (for a list of causes of an acquired flatfoot deformity in adults, see box 1).1 Patients whose acquired flatfoot is associated with a more generalised medical problem tend to receive their diagnosis and are referred appropriately. However, in patients whose “adult acquired flatfoot deformity” is a result of damage to the structures supporting the medial longitudinal arch, the diagnosis is often not made early.2 These patients are often otherwise healthier and tend to be relatively more affected by the loss of function resulting from an acquired flatfoot deformity. The most common cause of an acquired flatfoot deformity in an otherwise healthy adult is dysfunction of the tibialis posterior tendon, and this review provides an outline to its diagnosis and treatment. We seached PubMed for publications by using the keywords “flatfoot” and “tibialis posterior dysfunction”. ### Tibialis posterior dysfunction: a common condition Tibialis posterior dysfunction is well recognised by orthopaedic surgeons specialising in foot and ankle surgery and by podiatrists. However, greater general awareness of this condition is required,2 as most patients presenting to a general practitioner receive a diagnosis of ankle sprain or arthritis. By the time most patients present to a specialist foot and ankle clinic they have had the condition for several years and have consulted numerous doctors.3 Even general orthopaedic surgeons and physiotherapists often miss the diagnosis.3 However, tibialis posterior dysfunction need not remain a “specialist diagnosis” as it is usually diagnosed without any investigations, from a history and physical examination.2 Many patients benefit from relatively simple treatment, such as orthotic devices.4 Population based studies to identify the prevalence of tibialis posterior dysfunction are under way. In elderly people the condition …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations180
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207