MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143797948 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.l.00232

Surgical Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures with a Volar Locking Plate Versus Conventional Percutaneous Methods

2013· article· en· W2143797948 on OpenAlex
Alexia Karantana, Nicholas Downing, Daren P. Forward, Mark P. Hatton, Andrew M. Taylor, Brigitte E. Scammell, Chris Moran, Tim Davis

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGrip strengthRange of motionDashWristSurgeryPercutaneousRadial fracturesFixation (population genetics)Randomized controlled trialOrthodonticsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of displaced distal radial fractures treated with a volar locking plate with the results of such fractures treated with a conventional method of closed reduction and percutaneous wire fixation with supplemental bridging external fixation when required. Our aim was to ascertain whether the use of a volar locking plate improves functional outcomes. METHODS: A single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary care institution. One hundred and thirty patients (eighteen to seventy-three years of age) who had a displaced distal radial fracture were randomized to treatment with either a volar locking plate (n = 66) or a conventional percutaneous fixation method (n = 64). Outcome assessments were conducted at six weeks, twelve weeks, and one year. Outcomes were measured on the basis of scores on the Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM) and QuickDASH questionnaire (a shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, or DASH, Outcome Measure), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) scores, wrist range of motion, grip strength, and radiographic parameters. RESULTS: The rate of follow-up at one year was 95%. Patients in the volar locking-plate group had significantly better PEM and QuickDASH scores and range of motion at six weeks compared with patients in the conventional-treatment group, but there were no significant differences between the two groups at twelve weeks or one year. Grip strength was better in the plate group at all time points. The volar locking plate was better at restoring palmar tilt and radial height. Significantly more patients in the plate group were driving at the end of six weeks, but this did not translate to a significant difference between groups in terms of those returning to work by that time. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a volar locking plate resulted in a faster early recovery of function compared with use of conventional methods. However, no functional advantage was demonstrated at or beyond twelve weeks. Use of the volar locking plate resulted in better anatomical reduction and grip strength, but there was no significant difference in function between the groups at twelve weeks or one year. The earlier recovery of function may be of advantage to some patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.281 · 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