MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2142786875 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.081294

Static Knee Alignment Measurements among Caucasians and African Americans: The Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project

2009· article· en· W2142786875 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amanda E. Nelson, Larissa Braga, Andresa Braga-Baiak, Julius Atashili, Todd A. Schwartz, Jordan B. Renner, Charles G. Helmick, Joanne M. Jordan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesU.S. Public Health ServiceCenters for Disease Control and PreventionHartford Foundation for Public Giving
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisCondyleBody mass indexArthropathyKnee JointRadiographyOrthodonticsPlateau (mathematics)SurgeryInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine if knee alignment measures differ between African Americans and Caucasians without radiographic knee osteoarthritis (rOA). METHODS: A single knee was randomly selected from 175 participants in the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project without rOA in either knee. Anatomic axis, condylar, tibial plateau, and condylar plateau angles were measured by 1 radiologist; means were compared and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in knee alignment measurements between Caucasians and African Americans among men or women. CONCLUSION: Observed differences in knee rOA occurrence between African Americans and Caucasians are not explained by differences in static knee alignment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→