MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2361055275 · doi:10.1093/jhps/hnv058

Description and mid-term results of the ‘over the top’ technique for the treatment of the pincer deformity in femoroacetabular impingement

2015· article· en· W2361055275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Víctor M. Ilizaliturri, Pedro Joachin, Marco Acuña

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hip Preservation Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemoroacetabular impingementMedicineWOMACHip arthroscopyDeformitySurgeryLabrumArthroscopyAcetabular labrumReduction (mathematics)Osteoarthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pincer impingement is often treated by surgical labral separation from the acetabular rim and rim reduction. A more recent technique the so-called 'over the top' involves reduction of the bony acetabular rim without separation of the labrum. Our purpose is to report mid-term results of the 'over the top' technique. Between January 2006 and January 2013 a consecutive series of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) diagnosis, treated with the 'over the top' technique were included, using the lateral approach. The Western Ontario and MacMaster (WOMAC) scores were evaluated. Fifty patients (20 males and 30 females) from the Hip and Knee Joint Reconstructive and hip arthroscopy division were included. The average age was 30.5 years old and the average follow-up was 48 months (range 70-90). Preoperative WOMAC average was 42. Post-operative WOMAC was 81.3 (P = 0.01). One patient required an arthroscopic revision due to adherences, but had a full recovery after the revision surgery. The 'over the top' technique is an excellent choice for the treatment of the pincer deformity in the FAI avoiding the injury of the chondrolabral union.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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