A review of ski injuries resulting in combined injury to the anterior cruciate ligament and medial collateral ligaments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alpine skiing is a global winter recreational sport with 15 million participants in the United States alone, and an overall injury rate of 2.5 per 1,000 ski person-days. Isolated injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) or the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is common among ski injuries; however, combined injury to these structures is rare. Controversy in the management of ACL instability following alpine ski injury is diminishing with improvements in the techniques of intra-articular cruciate reconstruction. However, the management of the combined ACL-MCL injury remains something of an enigma. Evidence exists to support both surgical and nonsurgical management strategies for the medial structures, but little consensus exists for the timing of the repair. This paper highlights the mechanisms of ski injuries that can result in combined injury to the ACL and MCL. The anatomy and biomechanics of the medial complex as it relates both to stability and operative repair are reviewed, and literature on the techniques and indications used for MCL repair in the setting of a combined injury is presented. On the basis of this review, we believe that an injury to the MCL does not need to be repaired if the ACL is reconstructed after a combined injury.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it