MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100304667

Fascia: a morphological description and classification system based on a literature review.

2012· article· en· W2100304667 on OpenAlexaff
Myroslava Kumka, Jason Bonar

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyFasciaComputer scienceInformation retrievalRelevance (law)OntologyNomenclatureMedicineAnatomyTaxonomy (biology)BiologyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fascia is virtually inseparable from all structures in the body and acts to create continuity amongst tissues to enhance function and support. In the past fascia has been difficult to study leading to ambiguities in nomenclature, which have only recently been addressed. Through review of the available literature, advances in fascia research were compiled, and issues related to terminology, descriptions, and clinical relevance of fascia were addressed. Our multimodal search strategy was conducted in Medline and PubMed databases, with other targeted searches in Google Scholar and by hand, utilizing reference lists and conference proceedings.IN AN EFFORT TO ORGANIZE NOMENCLATURE FOR FASCIAL STRUCTURES PROVIDED BY THE FEDERATIVE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON ANATOMICAL TERMINOLOGY (FICAT), WE DEVELOPED A FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM WHICH INCLUDES FOUR CATEGORIES OF FASCIA: i) linking, ii) fascicular, iii) compression, and iv) separating fasciae. Each category was developed from descriptions in the literature on gross anatomy, histology, and biomechanics; the category names reflect the function of the fascia.An up-to-date definition of fascia is provided, as well as descriptions of its function and clinical features. Our classification demonstrates the use of internationally accepted terminology in an ontology which can improve understanding of major terms in each category of fascia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations140
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207