Intramedullary Steinmann Pin Fixation of Forearm Fractures in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study is a retrospective clinical and radiographic review of all children treated with intramedullary Steinmann pins for fixation of diaphyseal forearm fractures at one institution. Thirty patients were reviewed. Twenty-five patients had fractures of both bones, three had Monteggia fracture-dislocations, and two had isolated radial fractures. Eight fractures were open. The average age of the patients at the time of surgery was 9 years 3 months (range, 4 years 1 month-14 years 3 months). Time to union averaged 6 weeks but a slightly longer healing time was seen in patients older than 10 years of age. Subjective, objective, and radiographic evaluation at 3 years 6 months average followup revealed no significant side to side differences. There were six complications (two pin site infections, two cases of fracture displacement after pin removal, one extensor pollicus longus tendon rupture requiring repair, and one refracture), none of which affected outcome at followup. When combined with an open reduction, one intramedullary Steinmann pin provides adequate stability in most diaphyseal forearm fractures in children with excellent results and few complications.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".