Endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal humerus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied 100 patients who had undergone endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal humerus between 1976 and 1998. The outcome was assessed with regard to the survivorship of the patients, the salvaged limbs and the prostheses. Function was determined in the 47 surviving patients, of whom 30 were assessed using the Musculo-Skeletal Tumour Society (MSTS) rating scale and 38 completed the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) questionnaire. The median age of the patients was 34 years (10 to 80). The mean follow-up period for surviving patients was nine years (2 to 20). The mean MSTS score at follow-up was 79% and the mean TESS score was 72%. The length of bone which was resected influenced the functional outcome. Abduction of the shoulder was to 45 degrees in most patients. The overall survival was 42% at ten years and that of the limb without amputation 93%. The survival of the prostheses using mechanical failure as the endpoint was 86.5% at 20 years. Endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal humerus is a predictable procedure providing reasonable function of the arm with a low rate of complications at long-term follow-up.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".