MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2178228351 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.k.00488

Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair with and without Acromioplasty in the Treatment of Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears

2011· article· en· W2178228351 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter S. Macdonald, Sheila McRae, Jeffrey Leiter, Randy Mascarenhas, Peter Lapner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of ManitobaPan Am Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcromionAcromioplastyMedicineRotator cuffSurgeryCuffElbowArthroscopyShoulder surgeryTearsRotator cuff injuryRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this prospective randomized controlled trial was to compare functional and quality-of-life indices and rates of revision surgery in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without acromioplasty. METHODS: Eighty-six patients consented and were randomly assigned intraoperatively to one of two study groups, and sixty-eight of them completed the study. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index. Secondary outcome measures included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder assessment form and a count of revisions required in each group. Outcome measures were completed preoperatively and at three, six, twelve, eighteen, and twenty-four months after surgery. RESULTS: WORC and ASES scores improved significantly in each group over time (p < 0.001). There were no differences in WORC or ASES scores between the groups that had arthroscopic cuff repair with or without acromioplasty at any time point. There were no differences in scores on the basis of acromion type, nor were any interaction effects identified between group and acromion type. Four participants (9%) in the group that had arthroscopic cuff repair alone, one with a Type-2 and three with a Type-3 acromion, required additional surgery by the twenty-four-month time point. The number of patients who required additional surgery was greater (p = 0.05) in the group that had arthroscopic cuff repair alone than in the group that had arthroscopic cuff repair and acromioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with previous research reports in which there was no difference in functional and quality-of-life indices for patients who had rotator cuff repair with or without acromioplasty. The higher reoperation rate was found in the group without acromioplasty. Further study that includes follow-up imaging and patient-reported outcomes over a greater follow-up period is needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations162
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207