Talocalcaneal coalition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analysed 42 weight-bearing lateral radiographs of the ankle, 20 of which were from patients with a clinical and plain radiological diagnosis of talocalcaneal coalition (TCC) who subsequently had CT. The remainder were from 22 healthy volunteers with no clinical findings suggestive of hindfoot pathology. Four observers, blinded to the CT findings, independently evaluated the radiographs on two separate occasions. With the 95% confidence interval and using the CT findings as the comparison we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for the C-sign, and for other signs known to be associated with TCC. Similarly, we also calculated the interobserver and intraobserver reliability for these signs using the kappa statistic. Our results suggest that the C-sign is highly sensitive and specific for TCC. It is an accurate indicator and significantly more reliable than other previously recognised radiological signs of TCC. Features of the C-sign, however, cannot be relied upon to indicate whether the TCC is fibrous or bony.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".