A RANDOMIZED, CONTROLLED TRIAL OF ABOVE ELBOW VS BELOW ELBOW CASTS IN PEDIATRIC DISTAL THIRD FOREARM FRACTURES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We undertook a prospective, single blinded, randomized, controlled trial of one hundred children treated with either an above or below elbow cast for treatment of closed, distal third forearm fractures requiring reduction. The re-manipulation rate in the below elbow group was 2% (95%CI: 0–11%) compared to 6% (95%CI: 2–15%) in the above elbow group, p=0.62. Above elbow casts do not appear to improve fracture immobilization nor reduce the requirement for re-manipulation in pediatric distal third forearm fractures. Debate exists regarding the benefits of using below elbow casts instead of above elbow casts for maintaining reduction in pediatric distal third forearm fractures. The literature indicates a loss of reduction rate of 14.6% of children treated in an above elbow cast and 2.5% in those treated with a below elbow cast. We undertook a prospective, single blinded, randomized, controlled trial of one hundred children treated with either an above or below elbow cast for treatment of closed, distal third forearm fractures requiring reduction. Outcome measures included re-manipulation rate, fracture displacement during cast wear, and cast complications. One hundred patients were suitably enrolled; fifty-four received an above elbow cast, forty-six received a below elbow cast. The two groups were similar in terms of age and gender. The above elbow group contained a higher proportion of both bone fractures (41/54) than the below elbow group (27/46). There were no significant differences between the two cast groups in initial, post-reduction or cast-off fracture angulation; nor any difference in the amount of fracture displacement during cast wear. The number of cast complications was similar between the two groups. The re-manipulation rate in the below elbow group was 2% (95%CI: 0–11%) compared to 6% (95%CI: 2–15%) in the above elbow group, p=0.62. Above elbow casts do not appear to improve fracture immobilization nor reduce the requirement for re-manipulation in pediatric distal third forearm fractures. Funding Hip Hip Hooray, Saskatoon
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".