MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339581088 · doi:10.1093/jhps/hnv085

The direct environmental impact of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: a surgical waste audit of five cases

2016· article· en· W2339581088 on OpenAlexaff
Darren de, Kellee Stephens, Michelle Kuang, Nicole Simunovic, Jón Karlsson, Olufemi R. Ayeni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hip Preservation Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemoroacetabular impingementMedicineHip arthroscopyAuditArthroscopyGeneral surgeryPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health care facilities produce significant waste (2200 kg/bed/year) creating 2% of greenhouse gas emissions and 1% total solid waste nationwide, with 20-70% of waste coming from operating rooms. We performed a waste audit of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) to understand its environmental impact and identify areas for greening practices. A waste audit of five hip arthroscopy procedures for FAI was performed. All waste was collected and separated into six waste streams in real time: (i) normal/landfill waste; (ii) recyclable cardboards and plastics; (iii) biohazard waste; (iv) sharp items; (v) linens and (vi) sterile wrapping. The surgical waste (except laundered linens) from five FAI surgeries totaled 47.4 kg, including 21.7 kg (45.7%) of biohazard waste, 11.7 kg (24.6%) of sterile wrap, 6.4 kg (13.5%) of normal/landfill waste, 6.4 kg (13.5%) of recyclable plastics and 1.2 kg (2.6%) of sharp items. An average of 9.4 kg (excluding laundered linens) of waste was produced per procedure. Given the considerable biohazard waste produced by FAI procedures, additional recycling programs, continued adherence to proper waste segregation and an emphasis on 'green outcomes' is encouraged to demonstrate environmental responsibility and effectively manage and allocate finite resources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hip Preservation SurgerySame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207