Achondroplasia: Really rhizomelic?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Achondroplasia is the most common form of short limb dwarfism in humans. The shortening of the limb lengths in achondroplasia is widely described as "rhizomelic." While this appearance may be convincing clinically, the description is not necessarily true or helpful radiologically. The aims of this study, were therefore, to determine whether rhizomelic shortening is a true feature of achondroplasia at diagnosis in infancy. Humeral, radial, femoral, and tibial diaphyseal lengths were recorded by two independent observers from 22 skeletal surveys of infants with achondroplasia and compared with 150 normal age-matched control subjects. Upper and lower limb bone length ratios (radial/humeral and tibial/femoral lengths, respectively) in both groups were compared using an unpaired t-test. Mean upper limb length ratios were statistically higher within the achondroplasia group at 0.87 ± 0.04 (n = 22, mean age 70 ± 94 days) compared to normal controls at 0.79 ± 0.02 (n = 150, mean age 113 days ± 88 days; P < 0.0001). Lower limb length ratios were not significantly different between groups (0.84 ± 0.04 vs. 0.83 ± 0.02, P = 0.46). There was good inter-observer agreement of limb length measurements, with an average measurement difference of 0.1 ± 1.4 mm. In conclusion, infants with achondroplasia demonstrate statistically significant rhizomelic shortening within the upper limbs, but not lower limbs at diagnosis, compared to normal controls. The term "rhizomelic shortening" in relation to achondroplasia should be reserved when describing upper limb proportions. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".