Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze the result of secondary total hip arthroplasty (THA) after primary internal fixation failure in femoral neck fracture patients and compare the results with primary THA for femoral neck fracture. Materials and Methods: Among the femoral neck fracture patients, we analyzed clininal and radiologic results of those who underwent secondary THA after internal fixation failure and those who underwent THA as early treatment. Cases with patients over age 40 years and with at least two year of follow-up period were used for analysis. Periopertive conditions of patients were evaluated by using surgery time, bleeding amounts and period to start gait using walker or crutch after surgery. Clinical results were assessed by using Harris hip score and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and radiologic results were derived by observing follow-up simpe X-ray. Results: The group of secondary THA had longer surgery time, more bleeding amount and longer period to start gait. But between the two groups, there was no difference of clinical and radiologic result at final follwing up. Both of two group had excellent clinical and radiological results. Conclusion: THA after internal fixation showed excellent clinical and radiologic results that was comparable to compare with primary THA.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".