MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318800383 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e31823b4ed0

The Effect of Soft-Tissue Restraints After Type II Odontoid Fractures in the Elderly

2011· article· en· W2318800383 on OpenAlexaff
Colin McCabe, Stewart McLachlin, Stewart I. Bailey, Kevin R. Gurr, Christopher S. Bailey, Cynthia E. Dunning

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmMedicineSagittal planeSoft tissueRange of motionFacet (psychology)AnatomyBiomechanicsOrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: A biomechanical analysis of soft-tissue restraints to passive motion in odontoid fractures. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the role of the C1-C2 facet joint capsules and anterior longitudinal ligaments (ALLs) in the setting of a type II odontoid fracture in the elderly. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The odontoid process itself is the primary stabilizer at the C1-C2 level; however, little is known about the role of the soft-tissue structures that remain intact in the setting of an odontoid fracture after a low-energy mechanism. METHODS: Ten cadaveric C0-C2 spinal segments were studied. Specimens were tested under simulated axial rotation with an applied moment of ±1 Nm and with an application of a 10 N anteriorly directed force to the body of C2 to induce sagittal translation. Optical motion data were initially collected for the intact state and after a simulated dens fracture. The specimens were then divided into 2 groups, where 1 group underwent unilateral and then bilateral C1-C2 facet capsular injuries followed by an ALL injury. The second group underwent the ALL injury before the same capsular injuries. Changes in axial range of motion and C1-C2 translation were analyzed using 2-way repeated measures analyses of variance and post hoc Student-Newman-Keuls tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: In axial rotation, there was an increase in range of motion by approximately 13%, with the fracture of the dens compared with the intact state (P < 0.05). An increase was also present for each subsequent soft-tissue injury state compared with the previous (P < 0.05); however, there was no difference found between the 2 sectioning protocols. For sagittal translation testing, it was found that the odontoid fracture alone showed an increase of 3 mm of C1-C2 translation compared with intact (P < 0.05). Further soft-tissue injuries did not show an increase until the complete injury state. CONCLUSION: This study identifies that type II odontoid fractures without associated soft-tissue injury may be stable under certain loading modes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207