MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319331516 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0b013e318186eb79

Lower Limb Alignment in Children

2008· article· en· W2319331516 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjeev Sabharwal, Caixia Zhao, Michele Edgar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsSmiths Detection (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLower limbPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A full-length standing anteroposterior radiograph of the entire lower extremity has become the standard imaging modality for assessing lower limb alignment. Although reference values of frontal plane deformity parameters based on adult subjects have been established, such values may not be applicable to the pediatric population. The purpose of our study was to establish the reference values of frontal plane alignment and joint orientation angles in children based on a standing full-length radiograph. METHODS: A database at a single institution was searched for patients who were aged between 1 and 18 years at the time of undergoing a standing full-length radiograph of the lower extremities. Radiographic analysis of lower extremities without any abnormalities was performed by a single observer. Mechanical axis deviation, lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), tibiofemoral angle, joint line convergence angle, and mechanical axis station were calculated at yearly intervals. The data were summarized using descriptive statistics, and simple regression analysis was performed to determine the relationship between the patients' age and the magnitude of LDFA and MPTA. RESULTS: A total of 354 unaffected lower extremities in 253 children were analyzed. Between the ages of 1 and 2 years, the tendency for varus alignment of the lower limb was related to the varus orientation of the distal femur with a mean LDFA of 95 degrees (95% confidence interval [CI], 93-97 degrees). By the age of 3 years, the limb alignment changed to valgus related to a combination of decreasing varus orientation of the distal femur and a mild increase in valgus orientation of the proximal tibia with the mean MPTA changing from 89 degrees (95% CI, 88-90 degrees) to 91 degrees (95% CI, 90-92 degrees). After the age of 7 years, all joint orientation angles were noted to be within the range of reference values that are available for the adult population. Despite changes in limb alignment with growth, the mean mechanical axis of the lower extremity remained within the central half of the knee joint in children older than 1 year of age. CONCLUSIONS: The change in alignment of the lower limb from 1 to 4 years of life from varus to valgus is primarily related to a progressive decrease in varus orientation of the distal femur. In children younger than 7 years old, age-specific reference values for joint orientation angles of the lower extremity should be used instead of values derived from adult subjects.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations106
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207