Coronal plane partial articular fractures of the distal femoral condyle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronal plane fractures of the posterior femoral condyle, also known as Hoffa fractures, are rare. Lateral fractures are three times more common than medial fractures, although the reason for this is not clear. The exact mechanism of injury is likely to be a vertical shear force on the posterior femoral condyle with varying degrees of knee flexion. These fractures are commonly associated with high-energy trauma and are a diagnostic and surgical challenge. Hoffa fractures are often associated with inter- or supracondylar distal femoral fractures and CT scans are useful in delineating the coronal shear component, which can easily be missed. There are few recommendations in the literature regarding the surgical approach and methods of fixation that may be used for this injury. Non-operative treatment has been associated with poor outcomes. The goals of treatment are anatomical reduction of the articular surface with rigid, stable fixation to allow early mobilisation in order to restore function. A surgical approach that allows access to the posterior aspect of the femoral condyle is described and the use of postero-anterior lag screws with or without an additional buttress plate for fixation of these difficult fractures.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".