“Popeye muscle” morphology in OBPI elbow flexion contracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of elbow flexion contracture (EFC) in obstetrical brachial plexus injury (OBPI) is not established. In basic science models, neonatal denervation leads to impaired muscle growth. In clinical studies, diminished growth is correlated with extent of denervation, and improved with surgical repair. In EFC, the biceps are clinically short and round vs the contralateral size, termed the "Popeye muscle". The objective of this study was to determine if the biceps morphology (muscle belly and tendon length) in arms with EFC secondary to OBPI is different vs the contralateral. METHODS: This is a retrospective matched-cohort study. Patients with unilateral EFC (>20°) secondary to OBPI were identified (median = 6.6 years, range = 4.7-16.8). A blinded radiologist used computed tomography to measure length of the biceps short head muscle belly, and tendon bilaterally using standardised anatomical landmarks. RESULTS: Twelve patients were analyzed. The biceps muscle belly in the injured arm was shorter in all patients vs contralateral, mean difference = 3.6 cm (80%), p < 0.001. The biceps tendon in the injured arm was longer in all patients vs contralateral, mean difference = 1.13 cm (127%), p < 0.001. The total biceps length in the injured arm was shorter in all patients vs contralateral, mean difference = 2.5 cm (89%), p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first human study confirming growth discrepancy of an elbow flexor in EFC. Distinct biceps morphology is demonstrated, with a significantly shorter muscle belly and overall length, but longer tendon vs normal. This is termed the "Popeye muscle" for its irregular morphology. Findings are consistent with impaired limb growth in denervation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".