MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465790145 · doi:10.3928/01477447-20160616-06

Preoperative Pelvic Tilt Analysis Reduces Fluoroscopy Time in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty

2016· article· en· W2465790145 on OpenAlexaff
Colleen A. Weeks, Stephen Preston, James L. Howard, Edward M. Vasarhelyi, Jacob Matz, Brent A. Lanting

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopedics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluoroscopyMedicinePelvic tiltTechnicianSurgeryRadiation exposureRadiologyRadiographyNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) requires the use of intraoperative imaging, exposing the patient and surgical team to radiation. The authors hypothesized that calculation of the preoperative pelvic tilt angle and communication of this value with the fluoroscopy technician may result in a decrease in intraoperative fluoroscopy use. The study also examined total radiation exposure during the procedure to ensure that it was within safe limits. The pelvic tilt was calculated preoperatively for 100 consecutive patients undergoing THA by the direct anterior approach. The fluoroscopy technician was blinded to the value of pelvic tilt for the first 50 cases (control group), with the angle being communicated for the following 50 cases (test group). The total duration of fluoroscopy use for each case was recorded. The values were compared for the 2 experienced technicians involved in the study. The surgeon was blinded to the duration of fluoroscopy use in all cases. Mean fluoroscopy time was 28.65 seconds in the control group and 23.61 seconds in the test group (P=.033). No significant difference in duration of fluoroscopy use was found between the 2 fluoroscopy technicians. The control group and the test group were within safe limits of radiation exposure to both the patient and the surgical team. Preoperative pelvic tilt calculation significantly decreases the amount of imaging used during THA by the direct anterior approach. Although it was a statistically significant reduction, both groups were within safe limits for both the surgical team and the patients, and thus the clinical significance is unknown. [Orthopedics.2016; 39(5):e962-e966.].

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)0.007
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopedicsSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207