Radiographic clues to fractures of distal humerus in archaeological remains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Today, distal humeral fractures occur most frequently in children and adolescents, and are usually the result of a fall onto extended arms, or less often on flexed elbows. Trauma to the distal humerus at the physis and epiphyses often produces non‐displaced or mildly displaced fractures that are difficult to recognize radiographically. To help identify these types of injuries, clinicians have developed two measurement techniques that are applied to the X‐rays of the injured bones. In a preliminary attempt to assess the usefulness of these measurement techniques for recognizing trauma in archaeological skeletal remains, 25 humeri from two Ontario ossuary samples were submitted to radiography. Clinical data on distal humeral fractures, their incidence, and mechanisms of injury were also used to interpret the lifestyles and cultural activities of the aboriginal individuals under study. While only one healed fracture was suspected after gross observation, a total of four fractures were ultimately identified using the two measurements, the humerotangential‐angle (HTA) and the anterior hunieral line (AHL). Our results provide indirect, but telling, evidence of accidental childhood injuries to distal humerus in an archaeological population. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".