Functional Outcome (SF-36) of Patients with Displaced Calcaneal Fractures Compared to SF-36 Normative Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the general health status after treatment of displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures compared to normative data, other orthopaedic procedures, and other medical conditions. METHODS: Three hundred and twelve patients between 25 and 64 years of age were treated for displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures at a Level I trauma center. Followup ranged from 2 to 8 years. The Short Form 36 Health Status Survey (SF-36) was used for outcome measurement. RESULTS: The scores in eight SF-36 categories in patients with displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures differed by more than five points from the population norms. This suggests that there is clinical and social relevance to this injury. Outcomes in patients with displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures were not as good across most SF-36 categories as were outcomes of patients with other orthopaedic conditions. Outcomes in patients with intraarticular calcaneal fractures also were worse across most categories than outcomes in patients who had organ transplants or myocardial infarctions. CONCLUSION: By comparing treatment for displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures with treatment for orthopaedic problems or other disease processes, we concluded that intraarticular calcaneal fractures are serious life-changing events.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it