MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098775115 · doi:10.1016/s0161-4754(03)00008-3

Chiropractic Care of a Patient with Low Back Pain Associated with Subluxations and a Malgaigne-Type Pelvic Fracture

2004· article· en· W2098775115 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Alcantara, Gregory Plaugher, Richard A Elbert, Bryan Gatterman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic and Acetabular Injuries
Canadian institutionsCanadian Chiropractic Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChiropracticSubluxationSpinal manipulationLow back painOrthopedic surgeryPhysical therapyPelvisSpinal fractureSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the chiropractic care of a patient with a pelvic ring fracture and concomitant subluxations of multiple segments of the spinal column. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 23-year-old male, after falling down a flight of stairs, was initially hospitalized for fractures of the pelvis. Five weeks posthospitalization, the patient initiated chiropractic care with complaints of severe low back pain with lower extremity involvement. He also complained of neck pain and occipital headache. The patient had several positive low back orthopedic tests with bilaterally absent Achilles deep tendon reflexes. The anteroposterior radiographic view revealed ununited fractures at the left superior and inferior pubic ramus, noted as a type I Malgaigne fracture. Subluxations were detected at the left innominate (ie, fracture-subluxation) and at the patient's lumbar, thoracic, and cervical spine. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The patient was cared for with contact-specific, high-velocity, low-amplitude adjustments to sites of vertebral and sacroiliac subluxations. The patient's response to care was positive, receiving great pain relief. Less than 3 months after initiating care, the patient returned to work on regular duty. CONCLUSION: There are indications that patients suffering from the injuries described above may derive benefits from chiropractic care. The practitioner must pay careful attention to issues of biomechanical and vascular stability and adjustment modifications in these types of patients.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsSame topicPelvic and Acetabular InjuriesFrench-language works237,207