CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND PROGNOSIS OF DEEP DIGITAL FLEXOR TENDINOPATHY ASSESSED OVER TIME USING <scp>MRI</scp>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep digital flexor (DDF) tendinopathy is one of the most frequent causes of foot lameness and the prognosis is guarded. The progress of lesion healing may be followed by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging to formulate a prognosis and to adapt the rehabilitation program. We assessed the correlation of outcome with total tendon damage and temporal resolution of MR abnormalities. Images from 34 horses with DDF tendinopathy that had undergone at least two low-field standing MR examinations of the foot (mean 2.5 ± 1.3 times) were reviewed. No horse having a T1-GRE hyperintense lesion over 30 mm in length or over 10% tendon cross-sectional area returned to its previous activity level. Horses with concomitant lesions had worse outcome than horses with DDF tendinopathy only (P = 0.005). In all horses including those with excellent outcome, the lesion persisted, even mildly, in T1-GRE and PD images. Horses with tendon lesion resolution on STIR-FSE and T2-FSE images on recheck examination had a better outcome (P = 0.0004 and P = 0.002, respectively), and all horses that returned to their previous level of performance had complete resolution of signal hyperintensity on the STIR-FSE sequence. Although rehabilitation remains multifactorial, characteristics of DDF tendinopathy and concomitant lesions on first and recheck MR examinations allow refining the prognosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it