MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138395185 · doi:10.1302/0301-620x.93b3.25327

Damage of an Oxinium femoral head and polyethylene liner following ‘routine’ total hip replacement

2011· article· en· W2138395185 on OpenAlexaff
Richard W. McCalden, Kory D. Charron, R. D. Davidson, Matthew G. Teeter, David W. Holdsworth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemoral headPolyethyleneReduction (mathematics)MedicineTotal hip replacementSurgeryHead (geology)Materials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a case of early retrieval of an Oxinium femoral head and corresponding polyethylene liner where there was significant surface damage to the head and polyethylene. The implants were retrieved at the time of revision surgery to correct leg-length discrepancy just 48 hours after the primary hip replacement. Appropriate analysis of the retrieved femoral head demonstrated loss of the Oxinium layer with exposure of the underlying substrate and transfer of titanium from the acetabular shell at the time of a reduction of the index total hip replacement. In addition, the level of damage to the polyethylene was extensive despite only 48 hours in situ. The purpose of this report is to highlight the care that is required at the time of reduction, especially with these hard femoral counter-faces such as Oxinium. To our knowledge, the damage occurring at the time of reduction has not been previously reported following the retrieval of an otherwise well-functioning hip replacement.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations37
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British VolumeSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207