MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2421064698 · doi:10.13107/jocr.2250-0685.294

Single Stage Tibial Osteotomy and Long Stem Total Knee Arthroplasty to Correct Adverse Consequences of Unequal Tibial Lengthening with an Ilizarov Circular Fixator.

2016· article· en· W2421064698 on OpenAlexaff
Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsDawson College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteotomyHigh tibial osteotomyExternal fixationDeformityIlizarov TechniqueExternal fixatorTibiaSurgeryDistraction osteogenesisFixation (population genetics)OrthodonticsDistractionOsteoarthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Correction of limb alignment or length discrepancy by circular external fixation is an accepted technique which relies on the correct biomechanical application of the frame and precise corrections which are frequently delegated to the patient to perform. Errors can occur in the execution of the correction by the patient and may result in significant deformity that requires remedial intervention. CASE REPORT: A 67 Caucasian female underwent multifocal limb reconstruction of the lower limb utilising a complex Ilizarov frame. Attendance at follow-up visits did not occur and the patient presented at 6 months with severe deformity due to incorrect execution of the correction protocol which resulted in a 45 degree varus deformity of the tibia. Subsequent correction via acute tibial osteotomy and stabilisation with a stemmed total knee replacement resulted in a good outcome. CONCLUSION: Patient compliance with post-operative management is paramount with distraction osteogenesis and should be ensured prior to embarking on lengthening or deformity correction.

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)0.000
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→