Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The precise etiology of Kienböck's disease is unclear. Controversy exists regarding the appropriate treatment modality. The present study sought to investigate and compare surgical and nonsurgical treatment outcomes of patients suffering from Kienböck's disease in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada. METHODS: The present study was a retrospective analysis of 66 patients. The primary outcome was the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score. Student's t test was used to assess differences in outcomes between treatment groups. One-way ANOVA was used to assess differences in primary outcome in time since first assessed in an effort to examine progression over time. Pearson correlation was used to assess for correlation between primary outcome and age at diagnosis. RESULTS: The average age was 38.6 ± 11.4 (18-70) years; Four patients were excluded due to inaccessible imaging. Of the remaining patients, 44 were treated conservatively, while 18 were treated surgically. The DASH scores for the surgical group were 23.7 ± 24.5 (0.9-82.8) and nonsurgical group were 20.0 ± 20.1 (1.7-81). As expected, the surgical group was mainly comprised of late-stage Kienböck's. When both groups were compared, there was no significant difference in the DASH scores. There were no difference in DASH scores within groups according to time since first diagnosed (<5 years; between 5 and 10 years; and >10 years). A positive correlation was found between age at diagnosis and DASH score (r = 0.42, p = 0.007), despite treatment modality. This finding remained significant after accounting for confounding factors (p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: The DASH score for the surgical group was 23.7 ± 24.5 (0.9-82.8) and nonsurgical group was 20.0 ± 20.1 (1.7-81). No significant difference in DASH scores was found between surgically and nonsurgically treated patients. A positive association was found between the age at diagnosis of Kienböck's and DASH score, which suggests that patients diagnosed and treated later in life tend not to do as well.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".