MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of Pain in Patients With Apparently Solidly Fixed Total Hip Arthroplasty Components

2002· review· en· W2103468495 on OpenAlexaff
Graham M. Robbins, Bassam A. Masri, Donald S. Garbuz, Clivе P. Duncan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiographyOccultArthroplastyImplantHip painTotal hip arthroplastyPhysical examinationSoft tissueErythrocyte sedimentation rateRadiologySurgeryHip arthroplastyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cause of pain in a patient with an apparently solidly fixed total hip arthroplasty can be difficult to elucidate. A detailed history, careful examination, and plain radiographs provide the most useful information, especially in excluding causes not primarily related to the hip. Determining whether the pain is related to the implant, to soft tissue, or to bone can require laboratory tests, radiographic and fluoroscopic imaging, and contrast arthrography and local anesthetic injections. Particularly when pain is caused by occult infection, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein level, hip aspiration, advanced radiologic imaging, and nuclear medicine scans can help determine the diagnosis.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations41
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207