Evaluation of the Instability Severity Index Score and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index as predictors of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we evaluated whether the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) could detect those patients at risk of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Between April 2008 and June 2010, the ISIS and WOSI were recorded pre-operatively in 110 patients (87 male, 79%) with a mean age of 25.1 years (16 to 61) who underwent this procedure for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. A telephone interview was performed two-years post-operatively to determine whether patients had experienced a recurrent dislocation and whether they had returned to pre-injury activity levels. In all, six (5%) patients had an ISIS > 6 points (0 to 9). Of 100 (91%) patients available two years post-operatively, six (6%) had a recurrent dislocation, and 28 (28%) did not return to pre-injury activity. No patient who dislocated had an ISIS > 6 (p = 1.0). There was no difference in the mean pre-operative WOSI in those who had a re-dislocation and those who did not (p = 0.99). The pre-operative WOSI was significantly lower (p = 0.02) in those who did not return to pre-injury activity, whereas the ISIS was not associated with return to pre-injury activity (p = 0.13). In conclusion, neither the pre-operative ISIS nor WOSI predicted recurrent dislocation within two years of arthroscopic Bankart repair. Patients with a lower pre-operative WOSI were less likely to return to pre-injury activity.
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 | 0.011 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".